Can tantalum cones provide fixation in complex revision knee arthroplasty?

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

Volumn 470, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 199-204

  Lachiewicz, Paul F ^a,c   Bolognesi, Michael P ^b   Henderson, Robert A ^b   Soileau, Elizabeth S ^c   Vail, Thomas Parker ^d  

^a DURHAM VA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c Chapel Hill Orthopedics Surgery and Sports Medicine   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC BONE CEMENT; ENDURANCE GENTAMICIN; SIMPLEX P TOBRAMYCIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; TANTALUM;

ADULT; BONE DEFECT; BONE RADIOGRAPHY; BONE REGENERATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONFERENCE PAPER; FEMALE; FEMUR SHAFT FRACTURE; FLEXION CONTRACTURE; FOLLOW UP; HEART ATRIUM FIBRILLATION; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; INFECTION RISK; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; KNEE FUNCTION; LUNG EMBOLISM; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; ORTHOPEDIC FIXATION DEVICE; PEROPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS FIXATION; PROSTHESIS LOOSENING; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TANTALUM CONE; WOUND DEHISCENCE; AGED; ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; DRUG EFFECT; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; JOINT INSTABILITY; KNEE PROSTHESIS; METHODOLOGY; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PHYSIOLOGY; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; JOINT INSTABILITY; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSSEOINTEGRATION; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TANTALUM; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84861996187     PISSN: 0009921X     EISSN: 15281132     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11999-011-1888-9     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Backstein D, Safir O, Gross A. Management of bone loss: structural grafts in revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;446:104-112.
2. Barrack RL, Jennings RW, Wolfe MW, Bertot AJ. The Coventry award: the value of preoperative aspiration before total knee revision. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;345:8-16.
3. Bauman RD, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD. Limitations of structural allograft in revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:818-824.
4. Benjamin J, Engh G, Parsley B, Donaldson T, Coon T. Morselized bone grafting of defects in revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;392:62-67.
5. Bobyn JD, Stackpool GJ, Hacking SA, Tanzer M, Krygier JJ. Characteristics of bone ingrowth and interface mechanics of a new porous tantalum biomaterial. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999;81: 907-914.
6. Clatworthy MG, Ballance J, Brick GW, Chandler HP, Gross AE. The use of structural allograft for uncontained defects in revision total knee arthroplasty. A minimum five-year review. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:404-411.
7. Duff GP, Lachiewicz PF, Kelley SS. Aspiration of the knee joint before revision arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;331: 132-139.
8. Engh GA, Ammeen DJ. Bone loss with revision total knee arthroplasty: defect classification and alternatives for reconstruction. Instr Course Lect. 1999;48:167-175.
9. Engh GA, Ammeen DJ. Use of structural allograft in revision total knee arthroplasty in knees with severe tibial bone loss. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:2640-2647.
10. Ewald FC. The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;248:9-12.
11. Findlay DM, Welldon K, Atkins GJ, Howie DW, Zannettino AC, Bobyn D. The proliferation and phenotypic expression of human osteoblasts on tantalum metal. Biomaterials. 2004;25: 2215-2227.
12. Ghazavi MT, Stockley I, Yee G, Davis A, Gross AE. Reconstruction of massive bone defects with allograft in revision total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997;79:17-25.
13. Hockman DE, Ammeen D, Engh GA. Augments and allografts in revision total knee arthroplasty: usage and outcome using one modular revision prosthesis. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:35-41.
14. Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;248: 13-14.
15. Jacobs C, Christensen CP, Berend ME. Static and mobile antibiotic-impregnated cement spacers for the management of prosthetic joint infection. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009;17:356-368.
16. Long WJ, Scuderi GR. Porous tantalum cones for large metaphyseal tibial defects in revision total knee arthroplasty: a minimum 2-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:1086-1092.
17. Meneghini RM, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD. Use of porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss during revision total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90: 78-84.
18. Meneghini RM, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD. Use of porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss during revision total knee replacement. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(Suppl 2):131-138.
19. Parvizi J, Ghanem E, Sharkey P, Aggarwal A, Burnett RSJ, Barrack RL. Diagnosis of infected total knee: findings of a multicenter database. Clinical Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:2628-2633
20. Ries MD. Impacted cancellous autograft for contained bone defects in total knee arthroplasty. Am J Knee Surg. 1996;9:51-54.
21. Schildhauer TA, Peter E, Muhr G, Koller M. Activation of human leukocytes on tantalum trabecular metal in comparison to commonly used orthopedic metal implant materials. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2009;88:332-341.
22. Schildhauer TA, Robie B, Muhr G, Koller M. Bacterial adherence to tantalum versus commonly used orthopedic metallic implant materials. J Orthop Trauma. 2006;20:476-484.
23. Welldon KJ, Atkins GJ, Howie DW, Findlay DM. Primary human osteoblasts grow into porous tantalum and maintain an osteoblastic phenotype. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2008;84:691-701.