The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2009;91:1440-1447.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.00425
© 2009 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kim, Y.-H.
Right arrow Articles by Kim, J.-S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kim, Y.-H.
Right arrow Articles by Kim, J.-S.
Related Collections
Right arrow Adult Knee
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Facebook   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Use of a Constrained Condylar Knee Prosthesis

Young-Hoo Kim, MD1 and Jun-Shik Kim, MD1

1 The Joint Replacement Center of Korea at Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, 911-1, Mokdong, YangChun-Ku, Seoul 158-710, South Korea. E-mail address for Y.-H. Kim: younghookim{at}ewha.ac.kr

Investigation performed at The Joint Replacement Center of Korea, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea

Disclosure: The authors did not receive any outside funding or grants in support of their research for or preparation of this work. Neither they nor a member of their immediate families received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors, or a member of their immediate families, are affiliated or associated.


Background: The major goals of revision total knee arthroplasty include good clinical and radiographic results with a low complication rate. A retrospective review of a case series of revision total knee arthroplasties with a constrained condylar prosthesis by a single surgeon was performed in order to ascertain the role of this prosthesis and to determine whether it provided satisfactory results.

Methods: Ninety-seven patients (114 knees) underwent revision total knee arthroplasty with use of a constrained condylar knee prosthesis. There were eighty-four men and thirteen women. The mean age at the time of the index surgery was sixty-five years. The primary diagnosis was predominantly osteoarthritis (96%). The most common reason for revision was aseptic loosening of a component (54%). The mean time from the primary to the revision total knee arthroplasty was 6.1 years (range, six weeks to twenty-four years). The mean duration of follow-up was 7.2 years.

Results: The mean Hospital for Special Surgery knee score and mean Knee Society knee and functional scores were 31, 35, and 16 points, respectively, before the operation and 83, 90, and 64 points at the time of the final follow-up. The preoperative and postoperative Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores were 85 and 34.5 points, respectively. The complication rate was 9%. Five knees (4%) had a rerevision, and three knees (2.6%) had a quadriceps tendon rupture. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis, with revision or radiographic failure as the end point, revealed that the ten-year rate of survival of the components was 96% (95% confidence interval, 94% to 100%).

Conclusions: Revision total knee arthroplasty with use of a constrained condylar knee prosthesis had reproducible clinical success, but a complication rate of up to 9% can be expected at intermediate-term follow-up.

Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?