Top

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

Published in:

01-01-2012 | Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

Polyethylene Quality Affects Revision Knee Liner Exchange Survivorship

Authors: C. Anderson Engh Jr, MD, Nancy L. Parks, MS, Gerard A. Engh, MD

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 1/2012

Abstract

Background

Options to treat patients with wear or osteolysis include full revision, partial (tibial or femoral) revision, and isolated polyethylene exchange. It is unclear whether one choice is superior to the other. Polyethylene quality reportedly influences the survivorship of primary TKA, but similar reports are not described for revision TKA.

Questions/purposes

We compared the failure rate for the three procedures and the influence of polyethylene quality on failure.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 123 patients with 135 TKAs in which wear or osteolysis was thought to have contributed to the need for surgery. Twenty-five percent had an isolated polyethylene exchange, 39% a single-component revision, and 36% a full revision. We determined survivorship of the revisions. The mean follow-up for the 123 patients was 6.2 years. Fifteen patients (16 knees, or 12%) were lost before 5-year evaluations leaving 108 patients (119 knees, or 88%) for comparison of rerevision rates.

Results

Five-year survivorship was similar for all three procedures: 82% ± 14% for polyethylene exchange, 89% ± 8% for partial revision, and 88% ± 10% for a full revision. Polyethylene sterilization had the strongest influence on rerevision. Survivorship was 73% ± 16% for knees revised with gamma-in-air polyethylene compared to 92% ± 6% for nongamma or gamma-in-barrier sterilization methods.

Conclusions

The survival rates of isolated polyethylene exchange for wear or osteolysis are similar to those of a single-component or full revision when the components are well aligned and well fixed. Polyethylene sterilization influenced revision TKA survivorship in this study and should be reported in future studies.

Level of Evidence

Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Australian Orthopaedic Association. National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report 2009: Hip and Knee Arthroplasty, September 1999 to December 2009. Available at: http://www.dmac.adelaide.edu.au/aoanjrr/documents/aoanjrrreport_2009.pdf. Accessed March 22, 2011.

Babis GC, Trousdale RT, Morrey BF. The effectiveness of isolated tibial insert exchange in revision total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:64–68.PubMed

Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Chiu V, Vail TP, Rubash HE, Berry DJ. The epidemiology of revision total knee arthroplasty in the United States. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:45–51.PubMedCrossRef

Burnett RS, Keeney JA, Maloney WJ, Clohisy JC. Revision total knee arthroplasty for major osteolysis. Iowa Orthop J. 2009;29:28–37.PubMed

Collier MB, Engh CA Jr, Hatten KM, Ginn SD, Sheils TM, Engh GA. Radiographic assessment of the thickness lost from polyethylene tibial inserts that had been sterilized differently. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:1543–1552.PubMedCrossRef

Collier MB, Engh CA Jr, McAuley JP, Engh GA. Factors associated with thickness loss of polyethylene tibial bearings retrieved from unicondylar and total knee arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:1306–1314.PubMedCrossRef

Collier MB, Engh CA Jr, McAuley JP, Ginn SD, Engh GA. Osteolysis after total knee arthroplasty: influence of tibial baseplate surface finish and sterilization of polyethylene insert: findings at five to ten years postoperatively. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:2702–2708.PubMedCrossRef

Engh GA, Koralewicz LM, Pereles TR. Clinical results of modular polyethylene insert exchange with retention of total knee arthroplasty components. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82:516–523.PubMed

Engh GA, Parks NL, Ammeen DJ. Tibial osteolysis in cementless total knee arthroplasty: a review of 25 cases treated with and without tibial component revision. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;309:33–43.PubMed

10.

Fehring TK, Murphy JA, Hayes TD, Roberts DW, Pomeroy DL, Griffin WL. Factors influencing wear and osteolysis in press-fit condylar modular total knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;428:40–50.

11.

Ghomrawi HM, Kane RL, Eberly LE, Bershadsky B, Saleh KJ; NAKAR Study Group. Patterns of functional improvement after revision knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:2838–2845.

12.

Griffin WL, Fehring TK, Pomeroy DL, Gruen TA, Murphy JA. The Mark Coventry Award. Sterilization and wear-related failure in first-and second-generation press-fit condylar total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;464:16–20.PubMed

13.

Griffin WL, Scott RD, Dalury DF, Mahoney OM, Chiavetta JB, Odum SM. Modular insert exchange in knee arthroplasty for treatment of wear and osteolysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;464:132–137.PubMed

14.

Hossain F, Patel S, Haddad FS. Midterm assessment of causes and results of revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:1221–1228.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Jensen CL, Petersen MM, Jensen KE, Therbo M, Schroder HM. Outcome of isolated tibial polyethylene insert exchange after uncemented total knee arthroplasty: 27 patients followed for 8–71 months. Acta Orthop. 2006;77:917–920.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Jewett BA, Collier MB, Engh CA Jr. Radiographic measurements of tibial polyethylene thickness in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:860–866.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Sharkey PF, Hozack W, Rothman RH, Shastri S, Jacoby S. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;404:7–13.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Sheng PY, Konttinen L, Lehto M, Ogino D, Jamsen E, Nevalainen J, Pajamaki J, Halonen P, Konttinen YT. Revision total knee arthroplasty: 1990 through 1992. A review of the Finnish Arthroplasty Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:1425–1430.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Suarez J, Griffin W, Springer B, Fehring T, Mason JB, Odum S. Why do revision knee arthroplasties fail? J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:99–103.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Whiteside LA, Katerberg B. Revision of the polyethylene component for wear in TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;452:193–199.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Willson SE, Munro ML, Sandwell JC, Ezzet KA, Colwell CW Jr. Isolated tibial polyethylene insert exchange outcomes after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:96–101.PubMedCrossRef

Title: Polyethylene Quality Affects Revision Knee Liner Exchange Survivorship
Authors: C. Anderson Engh Jr, MD
Nancy L. Parks, MS
Gerard A. Engh, MD
Publication date: 01-01-2012
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 1/2012
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-1997-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Polyethylene Quality Affects Revision Knee Liner Exchange Survivorship

Abstract

Background

Questions/purposes

Patients and Methods

Results

Conclusions

Level of Evidence

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Questions/purposes

Patients and Methods

Results

Conclusions

Level of Evidence

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2012

Three-dimensional Morphology of the Knee Reveals Ethnic Differences

Revision Surgery for Patellofemoral Problems: Should We Always Resurface?

Does a Modified Gap-balancing Technique Result in Medial-pivot Knee Kinematics in Cruciate-retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty?: A Pilot Study

The Chitranjan Ranawat Award: Is Neutral Mechanical Alignment Normal for All Patients?: The Concept of Constitutional Varus

Hip Arthroscopy Improves Symptoms Associated with FAI in Selected Adolescent Athletes

Does Open Reduction of the Developmental Dislocated Hip Increase the Risk of Osteonecrosis?