Cargando…
Failure Analysis in Multiple TKA Revisions—Periprosthetic Infections Remain Surgeons’ Nemesis
Background: The aim of this study was to categorize reasons for failure and to analyze the survivorship of multiple total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revisions. Methods: The study retrospectively evaluated all multiple TKA revisions performed between 2005 and 2015 at the authors’ institutions. Sixty-thr...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8779106/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35054068 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11020376 |
_version_ | 1784637490062163968 |
---|---|
author | Kirschbaum, Stephanie Erhart, Sarah Perka, Carsten Hube, Robert Thiele, Kathi |
author_facet | Kirschbaum, Stephanie Erhart, Sarah Perka, Carsten Hube, Robert Thiele, Kathi |
author_sort | Kirschbaum, Stephanie |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: The aim of this study was to categorize reasons for failure and to analyze the survivorship of multiple total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revisions. Methods: The study retrospectively evaluated all multiple TKA revisions performed between 2005 and 2015 at the authors’ institutions. Sixty-three patients (35 female, 28 male, age 64 ± 10 years, follow-up 55 ± 36 months) underwent a total of 157 re-revision TKA surgeries (range 2–5). The revision indications were divided up into main diagnoses. Survivorship was evaluated by mixed model analysis. Results: The main overall reason for re-revision was periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (48%), followed by instability (12%), polyethylene wear (11%), malpositioning (8%), and aseptic loosening (8%). Survivorship shortened with an increasing number of revision surgeries (p = 0.003). While PJI was in 38% of all cases, the reason for the first revision, incidence increased constantly with the number of revisions (48% at second revision, 55% at third revision, 86% at fourth revision, and 100% at fifth revision, p = 0.022). If periprosthetic infection caused the first revision, patients showed an average of two more septic revisions at follow-up than patients with an aseptic first revision indication (p < 0.001). In 36% of cases, the reason for follow-up surgery in case of periprosthetic infection was again PJI. Conclusion: The probability of survival of the implanted knee arthroplasty is significantly reduced with each subsequent revision. Periprosthetic infection is the main cause of multiple revisions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8779106 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87791062022-01-22 Failure Analysis in Multiple TKA Revisions—Periprosthetic Infections Remain Surgeons’ Nemesis Kirschbaum, Stephanie Erhart, Sarah Perka, Carsten Hube, Robert Thiele, Kathi J Clin Med Article Background: The aim of this study was to categorize reasons for failure and to analyze the survivorship of multiple total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revisions. Methods: The study retrospectively evaluated all multiple TKA revisions performed between 2005 and 2015 at the authors’ institutions. Sixty-three patients (35 female, 28 male, age 64 ± 10 years, follow-up 55 ± 36 months) underwent a total of 157 re-revision TKA surgeries (range 2–5). The revision indications were divided up into main diagnoses. Survivorship was evaluated by mixed model analysis. Results: The main overall reason for re-revision was periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (48%), followed by instability (12%), polyethylene wear (11%), malpositioning (8%), and aseptic loosening (8%). Survivorship shortened with an increasing number of revision surgeries (p = 0.003). While PJI was in 38% of all cases, the reason for the first revision, incidence increased constantly with the number of revisions (48% at second revision, 55% at third revision, 86% at fourth revision, and 100% at fifth revision, p = 0.022). If periprosthetic infection caused the first revision, patients showed an average of two more septic revisions at follow-up than patients with an aseptic first revision indication (p < 0.001). In 36% of cases, the reason for follow-up surgery in case of periprosthetic infection was again PJI. Conclusion: The probability of survival of the implanted knee arthroplasty is significantly reduced with each subsequent revision. Periprosthetic infection is the main cause of multiple revisions. MDPI 2022-01-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8779106/ /pubmed/35054068 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11020376 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Kirschbaum, Stephanie Erhart, Sarah Perka, Carsten Hube, Robert Thiele, Kathi Failure Analysis in Multiple TKA Revisions—Periprosthetic Infections Remain Surgeons’ Nemesis |
title | Failure Analysis in Multiple TKA Revisions—Periprosthetic Infections Remain Surgeons’ Nemesis |
title_full | Failure Analysis in Multiple TKA Revisions—Periprosthetic Infections Remain Surgeons’ Nemesis |
title_fullStr | Failure Analysis in Multiple TKA Revisions—Periprosthetic Infections Remain Surgeons’ Nemesis |
title_full_unstemmed | Failure Analysis in Multiple TKA Revisions—Periprosthetic Infections Remain Surgeons’ Nemesis |
title_short | Failure Analysis in Multiple TKA Revisions—Periprosthetic Infections Remain Surgeons’ Nemesis |
title_sort | failure analysis in multiple tka revisions—periprosthetic infections remain surgeons’ nemesis |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8779106/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35054068 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11020376 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kirschbaumstephanie failureanalysisinmultipletkarevisionsperiprostheticinfectionsremainsurgeonsnemesis AT erhartsarah failureanalysisinmultipletkarevisionsperiprostheticinfectionsremainsurgeonsnemesis AT perkacarsten failureanalysisinmultipletkarevisionsperiprostheticinfectionsremainsurgeonsnemesis AT huberobert failureanalysisinmultipletkarevisionsperiprostheticinfectionsremainsurgeonsnemesis AT thielekathi failureanalysisinmultipletkarevisionsperiprostheticinfectionsremainsurgeonsnemesis |