Comparative evaluation of bone defect replacement methods in revision total knee arthroplasty

Objective: to evaluate the immediate and long-term outcomes of revision total knee arthroplasty using porous metaphyseal sleeves and cones. Materials and Methods. The study included 134 patients who underwent revision total knee arthroplasty. The patients were distributed among two groups based o...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Girkalo, Mikhail V., Shchanitsyn, Ivan N., Ostrovskiy, Vladimir V., Kozadaev, Maxim N., Derevyanov, Alexander V.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Saratov State Medical University 2023-03-01
Series:Saratov Medical Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:https://sarmj.org/sarmj.org/2023/01/comparative-evaluation-of-bone-defect-replacement-methods-in-revision-total-knee-arthroplasty
_version_ 1797449260464078848
author Girkalo, Mikhail V.
Shchanitsyn, Ivan N.
Ostrovskiy, Vladimir V.
Kozadaev, Maxim N.
Derevyanov, Alexander V.
author_facet Girkalo, Mikhail V.
Shchanitsyn, Ivan N.
Ostrovskiy, Vladimir V.
Kozadaev, Maxim N.
Derevyanov, Alexander V.
author_sort Girkalo, Mikhail V.
collection DOAJ
description Objective: to evaluate the immediate and long-term outcomes of revision total knee arthroplasty using porous metaphyseal sleeves and cones. Materials and Methods. The study included 134 patients who underwent revision total knee arthroplasty. The patients were distributed among two groups based on the type of metaphyseal fixator: sleeves (Group I, n=97 patients) and cones (Group II, n=37 patients). Surgical outcomes were assessed upon discharge from the hospital (after the hospital stay of 7-12 days), as well as after 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery. The survival rate of endoprostheses was analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method. A revision with total replacement of the endoprosthesis or its components was considered a critical event. Results. The analysis of the survival rate of endoprostheses in the form of various metaphyseal fixators showed that the groups of sleeves and cones did not differ statistically significantly as suggested by the logrank test (Mantel–Cox): p=0.108. Conclusion. The midterm follow-up revealed no difference in clinical, functional, or radiological outcomes of revision total knee arthroplasty performed for types 2A, 2B, and 3 of bone defect replacement (sensu Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute classification) using trabecular metal metaphyseal cones vs. sleeves.
first_indexed 2024-03-09T14:23:23Z
format Article
id doaj.art-1c40b9a586144ac59ca8ab1d127869a0
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2712-8253
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-09T14:23:23Z
publishDate 2023-03-01
publisher Saratov State Medical University
record_format Article
series Saratov Medical Journal
spelling doaj.art-1c40b9a586144ac59ca8ab1d127869a02023-11-28T08:26:22ZengSaratov State Medical UniversitySaratov Medical Journal2712-82532023-03-014118https://doi.org/10.15275/sarmj.2023.0104Comparative evaluation of bone defect replacement methods in revision total knee arthroplastyGirkalo, Mikhail V. 0Shchanitsyn, Ivan N. 1Ostrovskiy, Vladimir V. 2Kozadaev, Maxim N. 3Derevyanov, Alexander V. 4Scientific Research Institute of Traumatology, Orthopedics and Neurosurgery at V.I. Razumovsky State Medical University of SaratovScientific Research Institute of Traumatology, Orthopedics and Neurosurgery of V.I. Razumovsky State Medical University of SaratovScientific Research Institute of Traumatology, Orthopedics and Neurosurgery of V.I. Razumovsky State Medical University of SaratovScientific Research Institute of Traumatology, Orthopedics and Neurosurgery of V.I. Razumovsky State Medical University of SaratovScientific Research Institute of Traumatology, Orthopedics and Neurosurgery of V.I. Razumovsky State Medical University of SaratovObjective: to evaluate the immediate and long-term outcomes of revision total knee arthroplasty using porous metaphyseal sleeves and cones. Materials and Methods. The study included 134 patients who underwent revision total knee arthroplasty. The patients were distributed among two groups based on the type of metaphyseal fixator: sleeves (Group I, n=97 patients) and cones (Group II, n=37 patients). Surgical outcomes were assessed upon discharge from the hospital (after the hospital stay of 7-12 days), as well as after 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery. The survival rate of endoprostheses was analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method. A revision with total replacement of the endoprosthesis or its components was considered a critical event. Results. The analysis of the survival rate of endoprostheses in the form of various metaphyseal fixators showed that the groups of sleeves and cones did not differ statistically significantly as suggested by the logrank test (Mantel–Cox): p=0.108. Conclusion. The midterm follow-up revealed no difference in clinical, functional, or radiological outcomes of revision total knee arthroplasty performed for types 2A, 2B, and 3 of bone defect replacement (sensu Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute classification) using trabecular metal metaphyseal cones vs. sleeves. https://sarmj.org/sarmj.org/2023/01/comparative-evaluation-of-bone-defect-replacement-methods-in-revision-total-knee-arthroplastyrevision arthroplastyknee joint
spellingShingle Girkalo, Mikhail V.
Shchanitsyn, Ivan N.
Ostrovskiy, Vladimir V.
Kozadaev, Maxim N.
Derevyanov, Alexander V.
Comparative evaluation of bone defect replacement methods in revision total knee arthroplasty
Saratov Medical Journal
revision arthroplasty
knee joint
title Comparative evaluation of bone defect replacement methods in revision total knee arthroplasty
title_full Comparative evaluation of bone defect replacement methods in revision total knee arthroplasty
title_fullStr Comparative evaluation of bone defect replacement methods in revision total knee arthroplasty
title_full_unstemmed Comparative evaluation of bone defect replacement methods in revision total knee arthroplasty
title_short Comparative evaluation of bone defect replacement methods in revision total knee arthroplasty
title_sort comparative evaluation of bone defect replacement methods in revision total knee arthroplasty
topic revision arthroplasty
knee joint
url https://sarmj.org/sarmj.org/2023/01/comparative-evaluation-of-bone-defect-replacement-methods-in-revision-total-knee-arthroplasty
work_keys_str_mv AT girkalomikhailv comparativeevaluationofbonedefectreplacementmethodsinrevisiontotalkneearthroplasty
AT shchanitsynivann comparativeevaluationofbonedefectreplacementmethodsinrevisiontotalkneearthroplasty
AT ostrovskiyvladimirv comparativeevaluationofbonedefectreplacementmethodsinrevisiontotalkneearthroplasty
AT kozadaevmaximn comparativeevaluationofbonedefectreplacementmethodsinrevisiontotalkneearthroplasty
AT derevyanovalexanderv comparativeevaluationofbonedefectreplacementmethodsinrevisiontotalkneearthroplasty