Abstract
Introduction: With the growing number of primary knee arthroplasties, the number of revision operations is also increasing. The large number of unicondylar replacements carried out in the 1980’s, due to lack of modern total condylar implants, grant the revision techniques an outstanding significance in Hungary. One of the main issues of modern revision techniques is the management of bone defects, which can be solved by different methods documented in literature.
Aim of study: The aim of our study was to investigate the success and feasibility of the various defect management techniques by evaluating the results of revision knee prosthetic surgeries carried out at our clinic.
Patients and methods: Femoral and tibial bone defects had to be solved with revision surgeries in 35 cases, all performed due to aseptic loosening of uni- and total condylar prostheses implanted earlier. For filling of bone defects, metal augmentation of the prostheses was applied in 9 cases, allografts from bone bank were used in 11 cases, own cancellous bone was applied in 20 cases. Results were prospectively analysed with the help of the knee society rating system, with an average follow-up of two and a half years.
Results: Revision interventions were successful in 34 cases, detailed results are revealed in the presentation, complemented with case presentations. In a single case, repeated intervention surgery is indicated due to disorganisation of the structural allograft and the resulting loosening of the tibial component.
Conclusion: The success of the various bone replacement techniques, completed with adequate indication could be proven in all cases. The unsuccessful case proved that allograft incorporation should be supported by appropriate stem augmentation of the tibial component. In order to perform successful revision knee arthroplasty, we consider it fundamentally important to have a wide variety of allografts from bone bank and a modern knee prostheses system application already during primary implantations.
The abstracts were prepared by Mrs Anna Ligocka. Correspondence should be addressed to IX ICL of EFORT Organizing Committee, Department of Orthopaedics, ul. Kopernika 19, 31–501 Krakow, Poland
