Luca Cavagnaro, Lorenzo Mosconi, Valentina Providenti, Matteo Formica
{"title":"\"膝关节翻修手术复杂性的定义 \"每次翻修都一样吗?","authors":"Luca Cavagnaro, Lorenzo Mosconi, Valentina Providenti, Matteo Formica","doi":"10.1007/s00264-024-06259-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this paper is to define a subset of complex rTKA in terms of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes and complications. The secondary outcome of the authors is to propose a simple and easy-to-use guide for clinical network in rTKA management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Complex rTKAs were defined according to the presence of at least two of the following features: periprosthetic joint infection, re- revision, femoral and/or tibial massive bone defects, soft tissue impairment, stiffness, fracture requiring fixed component revision.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six patients underwent a standard rTKA (group A) while 24 had a complex rTKA (group B). The mean follow-up was 50.2 ± 16.4 months in group A and 49.5 ± 16.8 in group B (p = 0.44). The operative time was longer in group B (200.4 ± 131.4 min vs 110.2 ± 59.8 min). A greater intraoperative total blood loss (3014.2 ± 740.0 vs 2328.5 ± 620.6 ml, p < 0.001), intra and postoperative blood infusion (3.6 ± 1.2 vs 2.1 ± 1.2 units, p < 0.001) was reported in group B. Significant difference was obtained for global complication rate (11.5% group A vs 37.5% group B, p = 0.04), reoperation (7.7% group A vs 33.3% group B, p = p = 0.03) and re-revision (3.8% group A vs 25% group B, p = p = 0.04).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study describes a specific entity of rTKA that require higher surgical effort and increased surgical challenge (measured as increased surgical time, need of transfusions and complications). The proposed classification could provide an easy-to-use tool for quick grading of complexity in rTKA.</p>","PeriodicalId":14450,"journal":{"name":"International Orthopaedics","volume":" ","pages":"2609-2616"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Is every revision the same?\\\" definition of complexity in knee revision surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Luca Cavagnaro, Lorenzo Mosconi, Valentina Providenti, Matteo Formica\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00264-024-06259-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this paper is to define a subset of complex rTKA in terms of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes and complications. The secondary outcome of the authors is to propose a simple and easy-to-use guide for clinical network in rTKA management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Complex rTKAs were defined according to the presence of at least two of the following features: periprosthetic joint infection, re- revision, femoral and/or tibial massive bone defects, soft tissue impairment, stiffness, fracture requiring fixed component revision.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six patients underwent a standard rTKA (group A) while 24 had a complex rTKA (group B). The mean follow-up was 50.2 ± 16.4 months in group A and 49.5 ± 16.8 in group B (p = 0.44). The operative time was longer in group B (200.4 ± 131.4 min vs 110.2 ± 59.8 min). A greater intraoperative total blood loss (3014.2 ± 740.0 vs 2328.5 ± 620.6 ml, p < 0.001), intra and postoperative blood infusion (3.6 ± 1.2 vs 2.1 ± 1.2 units, p < 0.001) was reported in group B. Significant difference was obtained for global complication rate (11.5% group A vs 37.5% group B, p = 0.04), reoperation (7.7% group A vs 33.3% group B, p = p = 0.03) and re-revision (3.8% group A vs 25% group B, p = p = 0.04).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study describes a specific entity of rTKA that require higher surgical effort and increased surgical challenge (measured as increased surgical time, need of transfusions and complications). The proposed classification could provide an easy-to-use tool for quick grading of complexity in rTKA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14450,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Orthopaedics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2609-2616\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Orthopaedics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-024-06259-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-024-06259-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
"Is every revision the same?" definition of complexity in knee revision surgery.
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to define a subset of complex rTKA in terms of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes and complications. The secondary outcome of the authors is to propose a simple and easy-to-use guide for clinical network in rTKA management.
Methods: Complex rTKAs were defined according to the presence of at least two of the following features: periprosthetic joint infection, re- revision, femoral and/or tibial massive bone defects, soft tissue impairment, stiffness, fracture requiring fixed component revision.
Results: Twenty-six patients underwent a standard rTKA (group A) while 24 had a complex rTKA (group B). The mean follow-up was 50.2 ± 16.4 months in group A and 49.5 ± 16.8 in group B (p = 0.44). The operative time was longer in group B (200.4 ± 131.4 min vs 110.2 ± 59.8 min). A greater intraoperative total blood loss (3014.2 ± 740.0 vs 2328.5 ± 620.6 ml, p < 0.001), intra and postoperative blood infusion (3.6 ± 1.2 vs 2.1 ± 1.2 units, p < 0.001) was reported in group B. Significant difference was obtained for global complication rate (11.5% group A vs 37.5% group B, p = 0.04), reoperation (7.7% group A vs 33.3% group B, p = p = 0.03) and re-revision (3.8% group A vs 25% group B, p = p = 0.04).
Conclusion: This study describes a specific entity of rTKA that require higher surgical effort and increased surgical challenge (measured as increased surgical time, need of transfusions and complications). The proposed classification could provide an easy-to-use tool for quick grading of complexity in rTKA.
期刊介绍:
International Orthopaedics, the Official Journal of the Société Internationale de Chirurgie Orthopédique et de Traumatologie (SICOT) , publishes original papers from all over the world. The articles deal with clinical orthopaedic surgery or basic research directly connected with orthopaedic surgery. International Orthopaedics will also link all the members of SICOT by means of an insert that will be concerned with SICOT matters.
Finally, it is expected that news and information regarding all aspects of orthopaedic surgery, including meetings, panels, instructional courses, etc. will be brought to the attention of the readers.
Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been approved by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted.
Reports of animal experiments must state that the "Principles of laboratory animal care" (NIH publication No. 85-23, revised 1985) were followed, as well as specific national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals) where applicable.
The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfil the above-mentioned requirements.