Surgical Techniques in Total Knee Arthroplasty

2002 ◽  
Vol 84 (9) ◽  
pp. 1732 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Anderson Engh
Author(s):  
John M. Tarazi ◽  
Zhongming Chen ◽  
Giles R. Scuderi ◽  
Michael A. Mont

AbstractWith an expected increase in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures, revision TKA (rTKA) procedures continue to be a burden on the United States health care system. The evolution of surgical techniques and prosthetic designs has, however, provided a paradigm shift in the etiology of failure mechanisms of TKA. This review can shed light on the current reasons for revision, which may lead to insights on how to improve outcomes and lower future revision risks. We will primarily focus on the epidemiology of rTKA in the present time, but we will also review this in the context of various time periods to see how the field has evolved. We will review rTKAs: 1) prior to 1997; 2) between 1997 and 2000; 3) between 2000 and 2012; and 3) in the modern era since 2012. We will further subdivide each of the sections into reasons for early (first 2 years after index procedure) versus late revisions (greater than 2 years after index procedure). In doing so, it was determined that prior to 1997, the most prevalent causes of failure were infection, patella failure, polyethylene wear, and aseptic loosening. After a major shift of failure mechanisms was described by Sharkey et al, polyethylene wear and aseptic loosening became the leading causes for revision. However, with the improved manufacturing technology and implant design, polyethylene wear was replaced with aseptic loosening and infection as the leading causes of failure between 2000 and 2012. Since that time, in the modern era of TKA, mechanical loosening and infection have taken over the most prevalent causes for failure. Hopefully, with continued developments in component design and surgical techniques, as well as increased focus on infection reduction methods, the amount of rTKA procedures will decline.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junya Itou ◽  
Umito Kuwashima ◽  
Masafumi Itoh ◽  
Ken Okazaki

Abstract BackgroundPatellofemoral overstuffing after total knee arthroplasty can cause limited range of motion and anterior knee pain. This study compared anterior prominence of femoral components among different prothesis designs in surgical simulation models utilizing the anterior reference (AR) and posterior reference (PR) techniques.MethodsSurgical simulations were performed using preoperative computed tomography data of 30 patients on a three-dimensional planning system. Four implant models were used: Attune, Persona, Journey II, and Legion. Rotational alignment was set parallel to the transepicondylar axis and size selection was based on absence of notch formation in the femoral anterior cortex and best fit to the shape of the medial posterior femoral condyle. For each combination of surgical technique (AR or PR method) and implant model, measurements were taken of the maximum medial, central, and lateral prominence of the implant from the anterior femoral cortex (mm).ResultsUsing either the AR or PR method, the medial and central prominences were significantly lower with Journey II than with other models. The lateral prominence was the lowest with Attune in the AR method. The AR method was associated with significantly less prominence than the PR method, regardless of implant model.ConclusionsDegree of anterior prominence of the femoral implant is affected by implant design when the AR method is used. The PR method is associated with greater anterior prominence compared with the AR method, with size pitch an additional influencing factor. Journey II is associated with the least anterior prominence when using either method.


2020 ◽  
pp. 313-323
Author(s):  
P Archbold ◽  
J Pernin ◽  
G Demey ◽  
P Neyret ◽  
C Butcher

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (7) ◽  
pp. 499-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil P. Sheth ◽  
Adeel Husain ◽  
Charles Lenwood Nelson

2012 ◽  
Vol 134 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert A. Siston ◽  
Thomas L. Maack ◽  
Erin E. Hutter ◽  
Matthew D. Beal ◽  
Ajit M. W. Chaudhari

The success of total knee arthroplasty depends, in part, on the ability of the surgeon to properly manage the soft tissues surrounding the joint, but an objective definition as to what constitutes acceptable postoperative joint stability does not exist. Such a definition may not exist due to lack of suitable instrumentation, as joint stability is currently assessed by visual inspection while the surgeon manipulates the joint. Having the ability to accurately and precisely measure knee stability at the time of surgery represents a key requirement in the process of objectively defining acceptable joint stability. Therefore, we created a novel sterilizable device to allow surgeons to measure varus-valgus, internal-external, or anterior-posterior stability of the knee during a total knee arthroplasty. The device can be quickly adjusted between 0 deg and 90 deg of knee flexion. The device interfaces with a custom surgical navigation system, which records the resultant rotations or translations of the knee while the surgeon applies known loads to a patient’s limb with a handle instrumented with a load cell. We validated the performance of the device by having volunteers use it to apply loads to a mechanical linkage that simulated a knee joint; we then compared the joint moments calculated by our stability device against those recorded by a load cell in the simulated knee joint. Validation of the device showed low mean errors (less than 0.21 ± 1.38 Nm and 0.98 ± 3.93 N) and low RMS errors (less than 1.5 Nm and 5 N). Preliminary studies from total knee arthroplasties performed on ten cadaveric specimens also demonstrate the utility of our new device. Eventually, the use of this device may help determine how intra-operative knee stability relates to postoperative function and could lead to an objective definition of knee stability and more efficacious surgical techniques.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document