Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is a demanding procedure, with a high complication and failure rate and a high rate of bone losses and poor bone quality. Different classifications for bone losses have been proposed, but they do not consider bone quality, which may affect implant fixation. The aim of this study is to describe the outcomes of a consecutive series of rTKA. Furthermore, a modified bone loss classification will be proposed based also on bone quality. Finally, the association between radiolucent line (RLL) development and different risk factors will be evaluated. All the patients who underwent rTKA between 2008 and 2016 in the same institution were included. rTKAs were performed by the same surgeon according to the three-step technique. Bone losses were classified according to the proposed classification, including bone quality evaluation. The Knee Scoring System (KSS), the Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Score (HSS), and the SF-12 were used for the clinical evaluation. Radiological evaluation was performed according to the Knee Society Roentgenographic Evaluation System. Different possible risk factors (i.e., gender, age, amount of bone losses) associated to RLL development were identified, and this association was evaluated using logistic regression. Fifty-one patients (53 knees) were included (60.8% female, average age 71.5 years). The average follow-up was 56.6 months (range 24–182). The most frequent cause of failure was aseptic loosening (41.5%). 18.9% of the cases demonstrated poor bone quality. Bone losses were treated according to the proposed algorithm. In all the cases, there was a significant improvement in all the scores (P < 0.05). The average post-operative range of motion was 110.5° (SD 10.7). At the radiological evaluation, all the implants resulted well aligned, with 15.1% of non-progressive RLL. There were 2 failures, with a cumulative survivorship of 92.1% at the last follow-up (SD 5.3%). At the logistic regression, none of the evaluated variables resulted associated to RLL development. rTKA is a demanding procedure, and adequate treatment of bone losses is mandatory to achieve good results. However, also bone quality should be taken into consideration when approaching bone losses, and the proposed classification may need surgeons after an adequate validation. Level IV
Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is one of the most common orthopaedic procedures. Nevertheless, several complications can lead to implant failure. Peri-prosthetic joint infections (PJI) certainly represent a significant challenge in TJA, constituting a major cause of prosthetic revision. The surgeon may have an important role in reducing the PJI rate by limiting the impact of significant risk factors associated to either the patient, the operative environment or the post-operative care. In the pre-operative period, several preventive measures may be adopted to manage reversible medical comorbidities. Other recognised pre-operative risk factors are urinary tract infections, intra-articular corticosteroid injections and nasal colonisation with Staphylococcus (S.) aureus, particularly the methicillin-resistant strain (MRSA). In the intra-operative setting, protective measures for PJI include antibiotic prophylaxis, surgical-site antisepsis and use of pre-admission chlorhexidine washing and pulsed lavage during surgery. In this setting, the use of plastic adhesive drapes and sterile stockinette, as well as using personal protection systems, do not clearly reduce the risk of infection. On the contrary, using sterile theatre light handles and splash basins as well as an increased traffic in the operating room are all associated with an increased risk for PJI. In the post-operative period, other infections causing transient bacteraemia, blood transfusion and poor wound care are considered as risk factors for PJI. Cite this article: Ratto N, Arrigoni C, Rosso F, Bruzzone M, Dettoni F, Bonasia DE, Rossi R. Total knee arthroplasty and infection: how surgeons can reduce the risks. EFORT Open Rev 2016;1: 339-344 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.1.000032.
22 August 2014 in Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine