Dataset Information

Surgical Technique of a Cement-On-Cement Removal System for Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Revision Surgery.

ABSTRACT: Cement removal during hip or knee arthroplasty revision surgery is technically demanding and prone to severe complications such as periprosthetic fractures, incomplete cement removal, or perforations. Several alternative techniques have been developed to enable complete, accurate, and safe removal of cement from bone, including osteotomies and cortical windows, endoscopic instruments, ultrasound devices, lithotripsy, and laser-assisted removal. We describe a cement-on-cement technique with a sterile, single-use tool for cement removal. The cement is removed piece by piece using a specifically designed device, without osteotomies or cortical windows.

SUBMITTER: Tovar-Bazaga M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8217307 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Surgical Technique of a Cement-On-Cement Removal System for Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Revision Surgery.

Tovar-Bazaga Miguel M Sáez-Martínez David D Auñón Álvaro Á López-Oliva Felipe F Pardos-Mayo Belén B Calvo Emilio E

Arthroplasty today 20210615

Cement removal during hip or knee arthroplasty revision surgery is technically demanding and prone to severe complications such as periprosthetic fractures, incomplete cement removal, or perforations. Several alternative techniques have been developed to enable complete, accurate, and safe removal of cement from bone, including osteotomies and cortical windows, endoscopic instruments, ultrasound devices, lithotripsy, and laser-assisted removal. We describe a cement-on-cement technique with a ste ...[more]

PMID: 34189215

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose: Kinematic alignment (KA) for primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been shown to provide equivalent or better results to mechanical alignment (MA). The use of KA in revision TKA to restore the individual knee anatomy, kinematics, and soft-tissue balance, has not been documented yet. The purpose of this study is to describe the technique for performing TKA revision using the restricted KA (rKA) protocol and to report (1) rerevision rate and adverse events, (2) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and (3) radiological signs of implant dysfunction related to this technique. Methods: The rKA protocol was used in 43 selected TKA revisions cases suitable for the technique. Adverse events, reoperation, revision, and their causes were recorded. In addition, PROMs assessed by WOMAC score and radiographic evaluation to identify signs of implant dysfunction were documented at last follow-up. Results: After a mean follow-up of 4.0 years (0.9-7.7, ±2), only one rerevision (2.3%) was required for persisting instability (polyethylene liner exchange from posterior stabilized to a semi-constrained). Short-cemented stems were used for both the femur and tibia in 28 (65%) cases, for the femur alone in 13 (30%) cases, and no stems in two cases. In 31 (72%) cases, a standard posterior stabilized tibial insert was used, while 12 (28%) cases required a semi-constrained insert. The mean WOMAC score was 34.4 (0-80, ±21.7). Mean postoperative arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) was 0.8° varus (from 5° varus to 4° valgus), mean mechanical distal femoral angle was 1.7° valgus (from 2° varus to 5° valgus), and mean mechanical tibia proximal angle was 2.2° varus (from 5° varus to 1° valgus). No radiological evidence of aseptic loosening or periprosthetic radiolucencies were identified. Conclusion: Although current revision TKA implants are not ideal for revision TKA performed with rKA, they are an appealing alternative to MA, especially in cases of early, non-wear-related, unsuccessful MA TKAs. rKA TKA revision using short-cemented stems in conjunction with meticulous preoperative planning is safe in the mid-term. Level of evidence: IV.

Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this research was to systematically review and summarize the existent literature on the use of the cement-within-cement technique for revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA).MethodsWe followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were searched for relevant studies. We included clinical studies in which patients underwent RSA revision using the cement-within-cement method for the humeral component, and studies that evaluated the biomechanical performance or described the surgical technique. The methodological risk of bias was assessed using the methodological index for non-randomized studies scale.ResultsThe search yielded 516 records, of which two clinical and one biomechanical study met the inclusion criteria, involving 133 patients and 20 synthetic humeri. The intraoperative complication rate was 18%, all of which involved humeral fractures. The postoperative complication rate was 18% among 35 patients. The combined re-revision rate was 9%, with a reported humeral component survival rate of 100% at 2 years and 96% at 5 years. Periprosthetic fractures (1.5%) and humeral stem loosening (1.5%) led to re-revision surgeries in all cases. All studies reported improved patient-reported outcomes and range of motion. The biomechanical study demonstrated increased rotational stability in models that used larger humeral stems.ConclusionsThe cement-within-cement method is a viable option for revision RSA, showing positive outcomes in terms of stability, range of motion, and clinical functional scores. The complication rate is similar to that of other revision strategies; however, the prevalence of intraoperative humeral fractures may be higher. Nevertheless, future studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are needed to refine patient selection, determine the efficacy of long-term use, and identify factors that may influence outcomes after the cement-within-cement revision technique. Further research on an optimized stem fixation strategy is needed to improve outcomes and reduce avoidable complications.Level of evidenceLevel IV, Systematic reviews.

Project description:BackgroundFemoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a major cause of hip pain in young adults and athletes. Surgical treatment of FAI is recommended in cases of failed nonoperative treatment that have the typical clinical and radiographic findings. At present, the role of risk factors for revision surgery and progression to total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with FAI is still unclear.PurposeTo investigate the possible association between (1) rate of revision and progression to THA and (2) patient characteristics, type of lesion, family history of hip disease, type of intervention, radiographic parameters, physical examination, and pre- and postoperative scores.Study designSystematic review; Level of evidence, 4.MethodsThe present systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. In October 2020, the main online databases were accessed. All articles concerning surgical correction for selected patients with FAI were accessed. Patient characteristics, type of intervention, radiographic parameters, physical examination, and pre- and postoperative scores were assessed. The outcomes of interest were the possible association between these variables and the rate of revision and subsequent progression to THA using a multivariate analysis through the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient.ResultsData from 99 studies (9357 procedures) were collected. The median follow-up was 30.9 months (interquartile range, 24.0-45.0). The mean ± SD age was 33.4 ± 9.3 years; mean body mass index (BMI), 24.8 ± 4.8; percentage right side, 55.8% ± 8.0%; and percentage female sex, 47.5% ± 20.4%. The overall rate of revision was 5.29% (351 of 6641 patients), while the rate of subsequent progression to THA was 3.78% (263 of 6966 patients). Labral debridement (P < .0001), preoperative acetabular index (P = .01), and BMI (P = .03) all showed evidence of a statistically positive association with increased rates of THA. No other statistically significant associations were found between patient characteristics, type of lesion, family history of hip disease, type of intervention, radiographic parameters, physical examination, or pre- and postoperative scores and the rate of revision and/or progression to THA.ConclusionAlthough surgical procedures to treat FAI led to satisfactory outcomes, there was a revision rate of 5.29% in the 9357 procedures in the present systematic review. The rate of progression to THA after a median follow-up of 30 months was 3.78%. Patients who have a higher BMI and/or have a pathologic acetabular index and/or undergo labral debridement during correction of FAI are more at risk for a subsequent THA. We advocate additional education of this patient population in terms of expected outcomes and suggest surgical labral repair instead of debridement if needed.

Dataset Information

Surgical Technique of a Cement-On-Cement Removal System for Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Revision Surgery.

Publications

Surgical Technique of a Cement-On-Cement Removal System for Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Revision Surgery.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets