Introduction
In recent years, the use of constrained implants in complex primary TKA has gained popularity since these implants may better and more easily address severe instability present in complex primary cases (CPC). However, the need for a constrained TKA in CPC is controversial. We hypothesized that a standard TKA may be successful in most of CPC and that an intraoperative switching to a constrained device is rarely need even in the presence of severe instability and bone loss.
Materials and methods
A consecutive series of 24 CPC (28 knees) were analysed retrospectively. Inclusion criteria were a femoro-tibial angle > 12° and bone defect of grade 2–3 (group 1). Forty-eight patients (52 knees) were analysed as controls (group 2). Patients were followed up clinically and radiographically up to a minimum of 5 years.
Results
In group 1, a PS was used in 24 knees and a CR in 4. In no patient, a CCK or RHK was implanted. Bone defect was treated with bone cement plus cortical screws in 15 knees (53.5%), a medial wedge in 8 (28.5%), a medial wedge plus bone grafting with cancellous screws in 5 (17.8%). Metaphyseal sleeve or cone was not used. At the last follow-up, no significant difference was found in the clinical scores between the 2 groups.
Conclusion
In CPC with marked varus deformity, instability and bone loss, the use of primary TKA is associated with a clinical outcome comparable to standard cases. Ligamentous balancing may be addressed using primary implants and simple cost-effective techniques may be used to manage an extensive bone loss. In most CPC, an intraoperative switching to a constrained device is not necessary.
