Cargando…

Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: implants used and causes of failure()

OBJECTIVE: to determine the causes of unicondylar knee arthroplasty failures, as well as identify the implants used and the need of bone grafting in patients undergoing revision UKA in Center of Knee Surgery at the Instituto Nacional de Traumatologia e Ortopedia (INTO) in the period between January...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mozella, Alan de Paula, Borges Gonçalves, Felipe, Osterno Vasconcelos, Jansen, de Araújo Barros Cobra, Hugo Alexandre
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4511742/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26229792
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rboe.2014.03.018
_version_ 1782382386075402240
author Mozella, Alan de Paula
Borges Gonçalves, Felipe
Osterno Vasconcelos, Jansen
de Araújo Barros Cobra, Hugo Alexandre
author_facet Mozella, Alan de Paula
Borges Gonçalves, Felipe
Osterno Vasconcelos, Jansen
de Araújo Barros Cobra, Hugo Alexandre
author_sort Mozella, Alan de Paula
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: to determine the causes of unicondylar knee arthroplasty failures, as well as identify the implants used and the need of bone grafting in patients undergoing revision UKA in Center of Knee Surgery at the Instituto Nacional de Traumatologia e Ortopedia (INTO) in the period between January 1990 and January 2013. METHODS: a retrospective analysis of the medical documentation and imaging, determining the cause of failure of UKA and the time of its occurrence, as well as prosthetic components implanted during the review and the need for bone grafting. RESULTS: in this study, 27 UKA failures in 26 patients were included. Collapse of one or more components was the main cause of failure, occurring in 33% of patients. Aseptic failure was identified in 30% of cases, progression of osteoarthrosis in 15%, infection and pain 7% each, and osteolysis and polyethylene failure in 4% each. Early failure occurred in 41% of all revisions of UKA and late failure in 59%. 23 patients have undergone revision of UK. CONCLUSION: in 35% of revisions the use of bone grafting was needed in tibial area; in 3 cases we needed allograft from Tissue Bank. We did not use metal increase in any of the revision. In one patient we used implant constraint for instability.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4511742
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45117422015-07-30 Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: implants used and causes of failure() Mozella, Alan de Paula Borges Gonçalves, Felipe Osterno Vasconcelos, Jansen de Araújo Barros Cobra, Hugo Alexandre Rev Bras Ortop Original Article OBJECTIVE: to determine the causes of unicondylar knee arthroplasty failures, as well as identify the implants used and the need of bone grafting in patients undergoing revision UKA in Center of Knee Surgery at the Instituto Nacional de Traumatologia e Ortopedia (INTO) in the period between January 1990 and January 2013. METHODS: a retrospective analysis of the medical documentation and imaging, determining the cause of failure of UKA and the time of its occurrence, as well as prosthetic components implanted during the review and the need for bone grafting. RESULTS: in this study, 27 UKA failures in 26 patients were included. Collapse of one or more components was the main cause of failure, occurring in 33% of patients. Aseptic failure was identified in 30% of cases, progression of osteoarthrosis in 15%, infection and pain 7% each, and osteolysis and polyethylene failure in 4% each. Early failure occurred in 41% of all revisions of UKA and late failure in 59%. 23 patients have undergone revision of UK. CONCLUSION: in 35% of revisions the use of bone grafting was needed in tibial area; in 3 cases we needed allograft from Tissue Bank. We did not use metal increase in any of the revision. In one patient we used implant constraint for instability. Elsevier 2014-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC4511742/ /pubmed/26229792 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rboe.2014.03.018 Text en © 2014 Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Elsevier Editora Ltda. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Mozella, Alan de Paula
Borges Gonçalves, Felipe
Osterno Vasconcelos, Jansen
de Araújo Barros Cobra, Hugo Alexandre
Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: implants used and causes of failure()
title Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: implants used and causes of failure()
title_full Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: implants used and causes of failure()
title_fullStr Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: implants used and causes of failure()
title_full_unstemmed Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: implants used and causes of failure()
title_short Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: implants used and causes of failure()
title_sort revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: implants used and causes of failure()
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4511742/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26229792
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rboe.2014.03.018
work_keys_str_mv AT mozellaalandepaula revisionofunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyimplantsusedandcausesoffailure
AT borgesgoncalvesfelipe revisionofunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyimplantsusedandcausesoffailure
AT osternovasconcelosjansen revisionofunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyimplantsusedandcausesoffailure
AT dearaujobarroscobrahugoalexandre revisionofunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyimplantsusedandcausesoffailure