Indicación y resultados de la prótesis con estabilidad aumentada en la artroplastia primaria de rodilla [Constrained prosthesis in primary total knee arthroplasty]

Contenido principal del artículo

Santiago Pablo Vedoya
Germán Garabano
Hernán del Sel

Resumen

Introducción:
Presentamos los resultados funcionales y criterios de indicación para artroplastía de rodilla con estabilización superior al estabilizado posterior, en la artroplastia de rodilla primaria (ATR).
Materiales y métodos:
Análisis retrospectivo de 43 ATR en 40 pacientes, con seguimiento promedio de 6,2 años. 38 casos presentaban genu valgo artrósico y 5 genu varo artrósico. La suficiencia de los ligamentos colaterales se definió como suficiente, atenuado o incompetente. Se desarrollo un sistema de clasificación para los genu valgo que relacionara el tipo de rodilla con el implante elegido.
 Resultados
Se utilizaron 28 prótesis con estabilización posterior plus en pacientes con un deseje coronal promedio de 15.9°, de los cuales 21 presentaron ligamentos suficientes y 5 atenuados.
Se utilizo una prótesis constreñida en 7 pacientes con deseje en valgo promedio de 21.6°, 2 con ligamentos suficientes y 5 con ligamentos atenuados.
Se utilizaron 8 prótesis abisagradas rotatorias, 5 en pacientes con un genu valgo promedio de 24.6° (3 de ellas asociadas a recurvatum), 4 con ligamentos incompetentes y una con ligamentos atenuados, y tres con genu varo de 16° promedio.
 Conclusiones:
Recomendamos utilizar las prótesis estabilizadas plus en desejes < 20°, con ligamentos colaterales suficientes en ausencia de defectos óseos. Las prótesis constreñidas en pacientes con grandes desejes con ligamentos colaterales que presenten algún grado de suficiencia (a lo sumo atenuados). Las prótesis abisagradas rotatorias las reservamos para rodillas con incompetencia ligamentaria colateral o multidireccional, grandes defectos óseos o deformidades severas en artritis reumatoide o de origen neuropático.
 
Abstract
Introduction: The objective of this retrospective study was to show the functional results and indication criteria for prostheses for primary TKA with more constraint than posterior stabilization.
Methods: Forty-three TKA were analyzed in 40 patients, with an average follow-up of 6.2 years. Preoperative diagnoses were valgus osteoarthritis (38 cases) and varus osteoarthritis (5 cases). Sufficiency of the collateral ligaments was classified as sufficient, attenuated or incompetent, through physical examination and X-rays with varus-valgus stress. Functional results were evaluated using the KSS.
Results: Posterior-stabilized plus implants were used in 28 cases, with an average alignment of 15.9°: 26 were valgus knees, 21 of which presented sufficient and 5 attenuated ligaments. Constrained prostheses were used in 7 patients with an average valgus alignment of 21.6° (2 with sufficient and 5 with attenuated ligaments). Rotating-hinge prostheses were used in 8 patients, 5 with an average valgus alignment of 24.6° (3 of them associated with recurvatum), 4 with incompetent ligaments and one with attenuated ligaments. The average post-operative KSS was 84 (range 73-94) points. Noinstabilities were detected and prosthetic survival was 100% at the end of the follow-up.
Conclusions: We recommend using posterior-stabilized plus implants in deformities <20°, with sufficient collateral ligaments and no bone defects; constrained prosthesis in patients with greater deformity (>20°) and collateral ligaments with some degree of sufficiency (attenuated at the most); and rotating-hinge implants in knees with collateral or multidirectional ligament insufficiency, associated with recurvatum, significant bone defects or severe deformities in rheumatoid arthritis or with neuropathic origin.

Descargas

La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.

Métricas

Cargando métricas ...

Detalles del artículo

Cómo citar
Vedoya, S. P., Garabano, G., & del Sel, H. (2018). Indicación y resultados de la prótesis con estabilidad aumentada en la artroplastia primaria de rodilla [Constrained prosthesis in primary total knee arthroplasty]. Revista De La Asociación Argentina De Ortopedia Y Traumatología, 83(2), 94-100. https://doi.org/10.15417/issn.1852-7434.2018.83.2.775
Sección
Investigación Clínica

Citas

1- Naudie D, Rorabeck C. Managing instability in total knee arthroplasty with constrained and linked implants. AAOS Instructional Course Lectures, 2004; 53: 207-215.

2- Lachiewicz PF, Soileau ES. Results of second-generation constrained condilar prosthesis in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2011; 26-8: 1228-1231.

3- Miyasaka KC, Ranawat CS, Mullaji A. 10- to 20-year follow up of total knee arthroplasty for valgus deformities. Clin Orthop Rel Res 1997; 345: 29-37.

4- Girard J, Amzalag R. Total knee arthroplasty in valgus knees: Predictive preoperative parameters influencing a constrained design selection. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2009; 95: 260-266.

5- Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989; 248: 13-14.

6- Kim YH, Kim JS, Oh SW. Total knee arthroplasty in neuropathic arthropathy. J Bone Joint Surg Brit 2002; 84B: 216-221.

7- Lachiewicz PF, Soileau ES. Ten-year survival and clinical results of constrained components in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2006; 21-6: 803-808

8- Lombardi A., Berend K. Posterior-Stabilized Constrained Total Knee Arthroplasty for Complex Primary Cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89A: 90-102.

9- Kim YH, Kim JS. Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Use of a Constrained Condylar Knee Prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91A: 1440-1447.

10- Hartford JM, Goodman SB, Schurman DJ, Knoblick G. Complex primary and revision total knee arthroplasty using the constrained condylar prosthesis: an average 5-year follow up. J Arthroplasty 1998; 13: 380-387.

11- Springer BD, Hanssen AD, Sim FH, Lewallen DG. The kinematic rotating hinge prosthesis for complex knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Rel Res 2001; 392: 283-291.

12- Pour AE, Parvizi J, Slenker N, Purtill JJ, Sharkey PF. Rotating hinged total knee replacement: use with caution. J Bone Joint Surg 2007; 89A: 1735-41.

13- Puloski SK, McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ, et al. Tibial post wear in posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: an unrecognized source of polyethylene debris. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001; 83A: 390-395.

14- Ewald FC. The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Rel Res 1989; 248: 9-12.

15- Hernandez Vaquero D, Sandoval Garcia M. Hinged total knee arthroplasty in presence of ligamentous deficiency. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468: 1248-1253.

16- Yang JH, Yoon JR, Oh CH, Kim TS. Primary total knee arthroplasty using rotating-hinge prosthesis in severely affected knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012; 20: 517-523.

17- Kowalczewski J, Marczak D, Synder M, Sibinski M. Primary rotating-hinge total knee arthroplasty: good outcomes at mid-term follow-up. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29: 1202-1206.

18- Gehrke T, Kendoff D, Haasper C. The role of hinges in primary total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Brit 2014; 96B-11: 93-95.

19- Petrou G, Petrou H, Tilkeridis C, Stavrakis T, Kapetsis, Kremmidas N, Gavras M. Medium-term results with a primary cemented rotating-hinge total knee replacement. A 7 to 15 year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Brit 2004; 86B-6: 813-817.

20- Maynard LM, Sauber TJ, Kostopulos VK, Lavinge GS, Sewecke JJ, Sotereanos NG. Survival of primary condilar-contrained total knee arthroplasty at mínimum of 7 years. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29: 1197-1201.

21- Cottino U, Abdel M, Perry M, Mara K. Long-Term Results After Total Knee Arthroplasty with Contemporary Rotating-Hinge Prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017; 99: 324-30.