Skip to main content
Journal cover image

Can tantalum cones provide fixation in complex revision knee arthroplasty?

Publication ,  Journal Article
Lachiewicz, PF; Bolognesi, MP; Henderson, RA; Soileau, ES; Vail, TP
Published in: Clin Orthop Relat Res
January 2012

BACKGROUND: The best method for managing large bone defects during revision knee arthroplasty is unknown. Metaphyseal fixation using porous tantalum cones has been proposed for severe bone loss. Whether this approach achieves osseointegration with low complication rates is unclear. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore asked: (1) What is the risk of infection in revision knee arthroplasty with large bone defects reconstructed with porous tantalum cones? (2) What is the rate of osseointegration with these cones? (3) What is the rate of loosening and reoperation? (4) Is knee function restored? METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 27 patients who had 33 tantalum cones (nine femoral, 24 tibial) implanted during 27 revision knee arthroplasties. There were 14 women and 13 men with a mean age of 64.6 years. Preoperative diagnosis was reimplantation for infection in 13 knees, aseptic loosening in 10, and wear-osteolysis in four. Patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically using the score systems of the Knee Society and followed for a minimum of 2 years (mean, 3.3 years; range, 2-5.7 years). RESULTS: One knee with two cones was removed for infection. All but one cone showed osseointegration. One knee was revised for femoral cone and component loosening. There was one reoperation for femoral shaft fracture and one for superficial dehiscence. The mean Knee Society pain score improved from 40 points preoperatively to 79 points postoperatively. The mean function score improved from 19 points to 47 points. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations suggest metaphyseal fixation with tantalum cones can be achieved. Longer-term followup is required to determine whether the fixation is durable.

Duke Scholars

Published In

Clin Orthop Relat Res

DOI

EISSN

1528-1132

Publication Date

January 2012

Volume

470

Issue

1

Start / End Page

199 / 204

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Treatment Outcome
  • Tantalum
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Reoperation
  • Recovery of Function
  • Range of Motion, Articular
  • Prosthesis Failure
  • Preoperative Care
  • Pain Measurement
  • Osseointegration
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Lachiewicz, P. F., Bolognesi, M. P., Henderson, R. A., Soileau, E. S., & Vail, T. P. (2012). Can tantalum cones provide fixation in complex revision knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res, 470(1), 199–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-1888-9
Lachiewicz, Paul F., Michael P. Bolognesi, Robert A. Henderson, Elizabeth S. Soileau, and Thomas Parker Vail. “Can tantalum cones provide fixation in complex revision knee arthroplasty?Clin Orthop Relat Res 470, no. 1 (January 2012): 199–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-1888-9.
Lachiewicz PF, Bolognesi MP, Henderson RA, Soileau ES, Vail TP. Can tantalum cones provide fixation in complex revision knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Jan;470(1):199–204.
Lachiewicz, Paul F., et al. “Can tantalum cones provide fixation in complex revision knee arthroplasty?Clin Orthop Relat Res, vol. 470, no. 1, Jan. 2012, pp. 199–204. Pubmed, doi:10.1007/s11999-011-1888-9.
Lachiewicz PF, Bolognesi MP, Henderson RA, Soileau ES, Vail TP. Can tantalum cones provide fixation in complex revision knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Jan;470(1):199–204.
Journal cover image

Published In

Clin Orthop Relat Res

DOI

EISSN

1528-1132

Publication Date

January 2012

Volume

470

Issue

1

Start / End Page

199 / 204

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Treatment Outcome
  • Tantalum
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Reoperation
  • Recovery of Function
  • Range of Motion, Articular
  • Prosthesis Failure
  • Preoperative Care
  • Pain Measurement
  • Osseointegration