Email this article 
Early Outcomes of Patient-Specific Modular Cones for Substitution of Methaphysial and Diaphysial Bone Defects in Revision Knee Arthroplasty
- Authors: Cherny A.A.1, Kovalenko A.N.1, Bilyk S.S.1, Denisov A.O.1, Kazemirskiy A.V.1, Kulyaba T.A.1, Kornilov N.N.1
-
Affiliations:
- Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics
- Issue: Vol 25, No 2 (2019)
- Pages: 9-18
- Section: Clinical studies
- URL: https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1209
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2019-25-2-9-18
- ID: 1209
Cite item
Abstract
The aim of this study was the assessment of early outcomes of patient-specific three-dimensional titanium cones with specified porosity parameters to compensate for extensive metaphysical-diaphyseal bone defects in RTKA.
Materials and Methods. Since 2017 till 2019 30 patient-specific titanium cones (12 femoral and 18 tibial) implanted during 26 RTKAS. Clinical outcomes evaluated using KSS, WOMAC and fjS-12 scoring systems on average 10 (2–18) months after surgery. At the same time the stability of implant fixation analyzed using frontal, lateral and axial knee roentgenograms.
Results. During all procedures there were no technical difficulties in positioning and implantation of custom-made titanium cones. At the time of preparation of the publication, none of the patients had indications for further surgical intervention, as well as intra- and postoperative complications. Six months after surgery all scores improved significantly: KSS from 23 (2–42, SD 19.96) to 66.5 (62–78, SD 7.68), WOMAC from 59 (56–96, SD 28.31) to 32.25 (19–46, SD 11.76), the index FJS-12 was 29.16 points (0–68.75, SD 30.19). The average scores continued to improve up to 18 months: KSS — 97.5 (88–108, SD 9.14), WOMAC — 16.5 (9–24, SD 6.45), FJS-12 — 45.85 (25–75, SD 22.03). No radiolucent lines were noticed during this period of observation.
Conclusion. The original additive technology of designing and producing patient-specific titanium cones for compensation of extensive metaphyseal-diaphyseal bone defects in RTKA is a valid solution at least in the short term. A longer follow-up period is required to assess its medium-and long-term reliability compared to existing alternative surgical solutions.
About the authors
A. A. Cherny
Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics
Author for correspondence.
Email: alexander.cherny.spb@gmail.com
Alexander A. Cherny — orthopaedic surgeon
St. Petersburg
Russian FederationA. N. Kovalenko
Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics
Email: fake@neicon.ru
Anton N. Kovalenko — cand. Sci. (Med.), researcher, Department of Diagnosis of Diseases and Injuries of the Musculoskeletal System
St. Petersburg
Russian FederationS. S. Bilyk
Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics
Email: fake@neicon.ru
Stanislav S. Bilyk — laboratory assistant-researcher, Department of Diagnosis of Diseases and Injuries of the Musculoskeletal System
St. Petersburg
Russian FederationA. O. Denisov
Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics
Email: fake@neicon.ru
Aleksey O. Denisov — cand. Sci. (Med.), academic secretary
St. Petersburg
Russian FederationA. V. Kazemirskiy
Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics
Email: fake@neicon.ru
Alexander V. Kazemirskiy — cand. Sci. (Med.), senior researcher, Knee Pathology Department
St. Petersburg
Russian FederationT. A. Kulyaba
Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics
Email: fake@neicon.ru
Taras A. Kulyaba — Dr. Sci. (Med.), head of the Knee Pathology Department
St. Petersburg
Russian FederationN. N. Kornilov
Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics
Email: fake@neicon.ru
Nikolai N. Kornilov — Dr. Sci. (Med.), professor, chair of Traumatology and orthopedics; leading researcher, Knee Pathology Department
St. Petersburg
Russian FederationReferences
- Андреева Т.М., Огрызко Е.В., Попова М.М. Травматизм, ортопедическая заболеваемость, состояние травматолого ортопедической помощи населению России в 2017 году. М.: НМИЦ ТО им. Н.Н. Приорова; 2018. С. 131.
- Бовкис Г.Ю., Куляба Т.А., Корнилов Н.Н. Компенсация дефектов метаэпифизов бедренной и большеберцовой костей при ревизионном эндопротезировании коленного сустава – способы и результаты их применения (обзор литературы). Травматология и ортопедия России. 2016;22(2):101–113. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2016-0-2-101-113.
- Pala E., Trovarelli G., Angelini A., Maraldi M., Berizzi A., Ruggieri P. Megaprosthesis of the knee in tumor and revision surgery. acta Biomed. 2017;88 (Suppl 2):129-138. doi: 10.23750/abm.v88i2-S.6523.
- Jamali A.A. Digital templating and preoperative deformity analysis with standard imaging software. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(10): 2695-2704. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-0858-y.
- Engh G.A., Ammeen D.J. Bone loss with revision total knee arthroplasty: defect classification and alternatives for reconstruction. Instr Course Lect. 1999;48:167-175.
- Иржанский А.А., Куляба Т.А., Корнилов Н.Н. Валидация и культурная адаптация шкал оценки исходов заболеваний, повреждений и результатов лечения коленного сустава WoMac, KSS и FJS-12. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2018;24(2):70-79. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2018-24-2-70-79.
- Pour A.E., Parvizi J., Slenker N. Rotation hinged total knee replacement: use with caution. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(8):1735-1741.
- Revision total knee arthroplasty. ed. by. Engh G.A., Rorabeck C.H. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1997. 459 p.
- Villanueva-Martínez M., De la Torre-Escudero B., Rojo-Manaute J.M., Ríos-Luna A., Chana-Rodriguez F. Tantalum cones in revision total knee arthroplasty. a promising short-term result with 29 cones in 21 patients. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(6):988-993. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.09.003.
- Haidukewych G.J., Hanssen A., Jones R.D.J. Metaphyseal fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty: indications and techniques. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2011;19(6):311-318.
- Morgan-Jones R., Oussedik S.I., Graichen H., Haddad F.S. Zonal fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B(2):147-149. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.97b2.34144.
- Zanirato A., Formica M., Cavagnaro L., Divano S., Burastero G., Felli L. Metaphyseal cones and sleeves in revision total knee arthroplasty: Two sides of the same coin? complications, clinical and radiological results – systematic review of the literature. Musculoskelet Surg. 2019 Mar 16. doi: 10.1007/s12306-019-00598-y. [epub ahead of print].
- Thienpont E., Schwab P.E., Fennema P. Efficacy of patient-specific instruments in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99(6):521-530. doi: 10.2106/jBjS.16.00496. 2017.
- Jacquet C., Chan-Yu-Kin J., Sharma A., Argenson J-N., Parratte S., Ollivier M. More accurate correction using «patient-specific» cutting guides in opening wedge distal femur varization osteotomies. Int Orthop. 2018 Nov 9. [epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1007/s00264-018-4207-1.
- Donnez M., Ollivier M., Munier M., Berton P., Podgorski J-P., Chabrand P. et al. Are three-dimensional patientspecific cutting guides for open wedge high tibial osteotomy accurate? an in vitro study. J Orthop Surg Res. 2018;13(1).171. doi: 10.1186/s13018-018-0872-4.
- Luo W., Huang L., Liu H., Qu W., Zhao X., Wang C. et al. Customized knee prosthesis in treatment of giant cell tumors of the proximal tibia: application of 3-dimensional printing technology in surgical design. Med Sci Monit. 2017;23:1691-1700. doi: 10.12659/MSM.901436.
- McNamara C.A., Gösthe R.G., Patel P.D., Sanders K.C., Huaman G., Suarez J.C. Revision total knee arthroplasty using a custom tantalum implant in a patient following multiple failed revisions. Arthroplasty Today. 2017;3(1):13-17. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2016.08.003.
- Cavagnaro L., Burastero G., Chiarlone F., Felli L. A new custom-made porous titanium device in knee revision surgery: early results and technical notes. Orthop Proc. 2019;101-B:Suppl. 4:9. available from: https://online.boneandjoint.org.uk/DOI/abs/10.1302/1358-992x.2019.4.009.
Supplementary files
