Search

Recently, 3-dimensional (3D) printing technology has been used in the development of titanium metaphyseal cones to manage severe bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). This study assessed (1) radiographs; (2) functional outcomes; (3) complications; and (4) 2-year implant survivorship in patients receiving 3D-printed titanium metaphyseal cones for moderate-to-severe tibial and femoral bone loss in rTKA. A single institution, retrospective chart review was performed for patients with large bone defects treated with a 3D-printed femoral or tibial titanium metaphyseal cone between 2015 and 2017 during rTKA (N=54). Paired sample Recently, 3-dimensional (3D) printing technology has been used in the development of titanium metaphyseal cones to manage severe bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). This study assessed (1) radiographs; (2) functional outcomes; (3) complications; and (4) 2-year implant survivorship in patients receiving 3D-printed titanium metaphyseal cones for moderate-to-severe tibial and femoral bone loss in rTKA. A single institution, retrospective chart review was performed for patients with large bone defects treated with a 3D-printed femoral or tibial titanium metaphyseal cone between 2015 and 2017 during rTKA (N=54). Paired sample ttests analyzed Knee Society Scores (KSS). Kaplan–Meier analyses determined implant survivorship when the endpoint was cone revision for aseptic loosening, cone revision for any reason, and reoperation for any reason. The authors found that 51 (98.1%) of 52 available radiographs demonstrated well-fixed components without any evidence of loosening or migration. Mean postoperative KSS scores were significantly higher when compared with preoperative scores (80.4 vs 52.0; P>.001). One patient experienced aseptic loosening of their cone. Seven additional cones were explanted as a consequence of reinfection, 1 of which was removed prior to arthrodesis. Cone survivorship was 98.5% when the endpoint was cone revision due to aseptic loosening, 88.2% when cone revision was due to any reason, and 77.9% for any reoperation. Metaphyseal cones appear to be well-suited for large bone defects during rTKA and the authors' findings suggest that cones may be a viable option for metaphyseal fixation during rTKA. Future studies should focus on their durability during a longer time period. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(1):43–47.]

Educational ObjectivesAs a result of reading this article, physicians should be able to:1.Identify the available types of reconstruction for failed total hip arthroplasty.2.Summarize the preoperative workup of patients with failed total hip arthroplasty and massive proximal femoral bone loss.3.Assess the surgical technique of proximal femoral replacement for failed total hip arthroplasty.4.Recognize treatment complications, patient outcomes, and survival of proximal femoral megaprostheses for revision of failed total hip arthroplasty.Despite recent advances in device manufacturing and surgical techniques, the management of proximal femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty remains challenging. Currently, failed total hip arthroplasty in elderly and less active patients, nonunion of the proximal femur with multiple failed attempts at osteosynthesis, resection arthroplasty, and massive proximal femoral bone loss can be salvaged with proximal femoral replacement using a megaprosthesis. The procedure is technically demanding and requires careful preoperative planning. Instability and aseptic loosening are the major complications, especially in younger and more active patients. The new generation of modular proximal femoral replacement megaprostheses and the increased experience obtained with these surgeries have reduced complication rates and improved outcomes. [Despite recent advances in device manufacturing and surgical techniques, the management of proximal femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty remains challenging. Currently, failed total hip arthroplasty in elderly and less active patients, nonunion of the proximal femur with multiple failed attempts at osteosynthesis, resection arthroplasty, and massive proximal femoral bone loss can be salvaged with proximal femoral replacement using a megaprosthesis. The procedure is technically demanding and requires careful preoperative planning. Instability and aseptic loosening are the major complications, especially in younger and more active patients. The new generation of modular proximal femoral replacement megaprostheses and the increased experience obtained with these surgeries have reduced complication rates and improved outcomes. [Orthopedics.2014; 37(10):691–698.]