Why knee replacements fail in 2013: patient, surgeon, or implant?

Previous studies of failure mechanisms leading to revision total knee replacement (TKR) performed between 1986 and 2000 determined that many failed early, with a disproportionate amount accounted for by infection and implant-associated factors including wear, loosening and instability. Since then, efforts have been made to improve implant performance and instruct surgeons in best practice. Recently our centre participated in a multi-centre evaluation of 844 revision TKRs from 2010 to 2011. The purpose was to report a detailed analysis of failure mechanisms over time and to see if failure modes have changed over the past 10 to 15 years. Aseptic loosening was the predominant mechanism of failure (31.2%), followed by instability (18.7%), infection (16.2%), polyethylene wear (10.0%), arthrofibrosis (6.9%) and malalignment (6.6%). The mean time to failure was 5.9 years (ten days to 31 years), 35.3% of all revisions occurred at less than two years, and 60.2% in the first five years. With improvements in implant and polyethylene manufacture, polyethylene wear is no longer a leading cause of failure. Early mechanisms of failure are primarily technical errors. In addition to improving implant longevity, industry and surgeons must work together to decrease these technical errors. All reports on failure of TKR contain patients with unexplained pain who not infrequently have unmet expectations. Surgeons must work to achieve realistic patient expectations pre-operatively, and therefore, improve patient satisfaction post-operatively.

[1]  F. Hossain,et al.  Midterm Assessment of Causes and Results of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2010, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[2]  C. Chang,et al.  Causes and predictors of patient's dissatisfaction after uncomplicated total knee arthroplasty. , 2009, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[3]  N. Choi,et al.  Causes, Risk Factors, and Trends in Failures After TKA in Korea Over the Past 5 Years: A Multicenter Study , 2014, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[4]  K. Takaoka,et al.  In vivo comparison of wear particles between highly crosslinked polyethylene and conventional polyethylene in the same design of total knee arthroplasties. , 2009, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials.

[5]  Steven M. Kurtz,et al.  The Epidemiology of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in the United States , 2009 .

[6]  S. Kurtz,et al.  Alternative bearings in total knee arthroplasty: risk of early revision compared to traditional bearings , 2013, Acta orthopaedica.

[7]  A. Hofmann,et al.  Highly Crosslinked Polyethylene is Safe for Use in Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2008, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[8]  J. Katz,et al.  The changing demographics of total joint arthroplasty recipients in the United States and Ontario from 2001 to 2007. , 2012, Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology.

[9]  C. Howie,et al.  Predicting dissatisfaction following total knee replacement: a prospective study of 1217 patients. , 2010, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[10]  S. Kurtz,et al.  Oxidative properties and surface damage mechanisms of remelted highly crosslinked polyethylenes in total knee arthroplasty , 2013, International Orthopaedics.

[11]  P. Sharkey,et al.  Insall Award paper. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? , 2002, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[12]  D. Schneidmüller,et al.  Verwendungsraten von Prothesen der unteren Extremität in Deutschland und der Schweiz , 2011, Der Orthopäde.

[13]  T. Majima,et al.  What Are the Causes of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in Japan? , 2013, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[14]  M. Ritter,et al.  The effect of alignment and BMI on failure of total knee replacement. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[15]  M. Widmer,et al.  [Utilization rates of lower extremity prostheses in Germany and Switzerland: A comparison of the years 2005-2008]. , 2011, Der Orthopade.

[16]  S. Toksvig-Larsen,et al.  Knee arthroplasty: are patients' expectations fulfilled? , 2009, Acta orthopaedica.

[17]  J. Callaghan,et al.  Current Etiologies and Modes of Failure in Total Knee Arthroplasty Revision , 2006, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[18]  G. Gil-Gómez,et al.  Highly crosslinked polyethylene does not reduce the wear in total knee arthroplasty: in vivo study of particles in synovial fluid. , 2013, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[19]  A. Lombardi,et al.  Why are total knees failing today? Etiology of total knee revision in 2010 and 2011. , 2013, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[20]  P. Sharkey,et al.  Why Are Total Knee Arthroplasties Failing Today? , 2002 .

[21]  S. Odum,et al.  Early Failures in Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[22]  Edmund Lau,et al.  Impact of the economic downturn on total joint replacement demand in the United States: updated projections to 2021. , 2014, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[23]  S. Kurtz,et al.  Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. , 2007, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[24]  J. Moreland Mechanisms of failure in total knee arthroplasty. , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.