CONTEMPORARY BONE LOSS OPTIONS: REBUILD, REINFORCE AND AUGMENT

Bone loss is commonly encountered during revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Small defects can be adequately managed with cement filling (with or without screws), modular prosthetic augments, and morselized allograft. For larger defects, cancellous impaction grafting and structural allografts have traditionally been utilized. More recently, highly porous tantalum cones and titanium sleeves have been designed to achieve axial and rotational stability in the metaphysis and subsequent biologic fixation. Sleeves are linked to one type of prosthesis, whereas cones are unlinked and can be used with any implant design. Multiple studies have demonstrated excellent survivorship and radiographic osseointegration at mid-term follow-up. This article provides a review of contemporary methods of bone loss management with a focus on highly porous metals and an emphasis on the authors’ preferred method for managing the severe bone loss in revision TKA.

[1]  N. Pratt,et al.  The accuracy of reporting of periprosthetic joint infection to the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry , 2004, Bone & Joint Open.

[2]  K. Bugler,et al.  Metaphyseal Sleeves for Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: Good Short-Term Outcomes. , 2015, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[3]  B. Levine,et al.  The Use of Trabecular Metal Cones in Complex Primary and Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty. , 2015, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[4]  H. Migaud,et al.  Tantalum cones and bone defects in revision total knee arthroplasty. , 2015, Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR.

[5]  A. Hanssen,et al.  Porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss in revision knee arthroplasty: a five to nine-year follow-up. , 2015, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  R. Bitsch,et al.  Treatment of severe bone defects during revision total knee arthroplasty with structural allografts and porous metal cones-a systematic review. , 2015, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[7]  M. Austin,et al.  Revision total knee arthroplasty using metaphyseal sleeves at short-term follow-up. , 2014, Orthopedics.

[8]  F. Falez,et al.  Bone loss management in total knee revision surgery , 2014, International Orthopaedics.

[9]  S. Agarwal,et al.  Metal metaphyseal sleeves in revision total knee replacement. , 2013, The bone & joint journal.

[10]  G. Haidukewych,et al.  Cementless metaphyseal sleeves used for large tibial defects in revision total knee arthroplasty. , 2013, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[11]  D. Huten Femorotibial bone loss during revision total knee arthroplasty. , 2013, Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR.

[12]  J. Howard,et al.  Early results of the use of tantalum femoral cones for revision total knee arthroplasty. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[13]  Joanne B. Adams,et al.  Management of bone loss in revision TKA: it's a changing world. , 2010, Orthopedics.

[14]  D. Dennis,et al.  Revision total knee arthroplasty: surgical techniques. , 2009, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[15]  A. Hanssen,et al.  Use of porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss during revision total knee replacement. Surgical technique. , 2009, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[16]  A. Lombardi,et al.  Distal Femoral Replacement in Nontumor Cases with Severe Bone Loss and Instability , 2009, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[17]  A. Hanssen,et al.  Use of porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss during revision total knee replacement. , 2008, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[18]  Timothy G. Reish,et al.  Use of multi-detector computed tomography for the detection of periprosthetic osteolysis in total knee arthroplasty. , 2010, The journal of knee surgery.

[19]  D. Backstein,et al.  Management of Bone Loss: Structural Grafts in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2006, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[20]  G. Scuderi**,et al.  Management of Bone Loss: Augments, Cones, Offset Stems , 2006, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[21]  A. Hanssen,et al.  Modular acetabular augments: composite void fillers. , 2005, Orthopedics.

[22]  R. Bourne,et al.  The fate of augments to treat type-2 bone defects in revision knee arthroplasty. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[23]  R. Barrack,et al.  Modular, Mobile-Bearing Hinge Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[24]  A. Gross,et al.  The Use of Structural Allograft for Uncontained Defects in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Minimum Five-Year Review , 2001, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[25]  Michael Tanzer,et al.  Characteristics of bone ingrowth and interface mechanics of a new porous tantalum biomaterial , 1999 .

[26]  D. Ammeen,et al.  Bone loss with revision total knee arthroplasty: defect classification and alternatives for reconstruction. , 1999, Instructional course lectures.

[27]  G. Engh,et al.  Treatment of Major Defects of Bone with Bulk Allografts and Stemmed Components during Total Knee Arthroplasty* , 1997, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.