{"title":"Comparison of Clinical and Functional Outcomes in One vs Two Component Revision for Total Knee Arthroplasty.","authors":"L. Howard, C. Day, B. Masri, D. Garbuz","doi":"10.1302/3114-220798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE\nRevisions of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) may require revision of one or both tibial and femoral components. Our purpose was to examine the clinical and functional outcomes in 1- vs 2-component TKA revisions.\n\n\nMETHODS\nWe identified 92 1-component ( tibial or femoral) revisions at a single center. Our inclusion criteria were isolated revision of the tibial or femoral components with minimum 2-year follow-up. The included cases were matched 1:2 with a control group of 2-component revisions (tibial and femoral) by age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and indication for revision. We collected demographics, complications, operative times, any subsequent re-revisions, and functional outcome scores.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe median follow-up time for the 1- and 2-component revision groups were 10 years (range, 3 to 17) and 8 years (range, 2 to 18), respectively. The most common complication after re-revision in both groups was stiffness at 9 of 92 (9.8%) and 9 of 170 (5.3%) in the 1- and 2-component groups, respectively (p=0.20). The overall complication prevalence in the 1- and 2- component revision groups was similar 20 of 92 (22%) and 35 of 170 (21%), respectively (p=0.87). Subsequent re-revisions for any indication were encountered in 12 of 92 (13.0%) of the 1-component and 18 of 170 (11%) in the 2-component groups (p=0.69). There was no statistical difference in survivorship or functional outcomes scores between the groups.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nOur results sho wed that isolated revision of a single TKA component is an acceptable option, with comparable functional outcomes, complications, and survivorships when compared with both-component revision. As such, 1-component revision should be considered where appropriate.","PeriodicalId":280050,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of arthroplasty","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/3114-220798","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
PURPOSE
Revisions of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) may require revision of one or both tibial and femoral components. Our purpose was to examine the clinical and functional outcomes in 1- vs 2-component TKA revisions.
METHODS
We identified 92 1-component ( tibial or femoral) revisions at a single center. Our inclusion criteria were isolated revision of the tibial or femoral components with minimum 2-year follow-up. The included cases were matched 1:2 with a control group of 2-component revisions (tibial and femoral) by age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and indication for revision. We collected demographics, complications, operative times, any subsequent re-revisions, and functional outcome scores.
RESULTS
The median follow-up time for the 1- and 2-component revision groups were 10 years (range, 3 to 17) and 8 years (range, 2 to 18), respectively. The most common complication after re-revision in both groups was stiffness at 9 of 92 (9.8%) and 9 of 170 (5.3%) in the 1- and 2-component groups, respectively (p=0.20). The overall complication prevalence in the 1- and 2- component revision groups was similar 20 of 92 (22%) and 35 of 170 (21%), respectively (p=0.87). Subsequent re-revisions for any indication were encountered in 12 of 92 (13.0%) of the 1-component and 18 of 170 (11%) in the 2-component groups (p=0.69). There was no statistical difference in survivorship or functional outcomes scores between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results sho wed that isolated revision of a single TKA component is an acceptable option, with comparable functional outcomes, complications, and survivorships when compared with both-component revision. As such, 1-component revision should be considered where appropriate.