Background: Bone loss remains an anticipated challenge in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). Recent efforts to enhance rTKA fixation and stability have focused on metaphyseal implants, namely cones and sleeves. We sought to compare cone and sleeve implant survivorship in rTKA.
Methods: One hundred eighty patients who underwent rTKA with metaphyseal implants from 2005 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 83 cones (22 femoral, 62 tibial) and 121 sleeves (58 femoral, 63 tibial) were identified. The mean age at the time of surgery was 72 years (range 43-97). Intraoperative Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute bone loss classifications included the following: type 2A (25), type 2B (98), and type 3 (81). Mean follow-up was 41 months.
Results: Revision-free survival for cones was 91.3% vs 92.2% for sleeves (P = .29). Twelve knees (4 cones, 8 sleeves) underwent irrigation, debridement, and polyethylene exchange with metaphyseal implant retention for acute postoperative periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Development of chronic PJI warranted removal of 7 cones (8.4%), 6 of which were initially placed as part of a 2-stage revision TKA. Eight sleeves (6.6%) were removed for PJI, with all initially placed during a second stage reimplantation. In the absence of infection, survival was 100% and 99.1% for cones and sleeves, respectively. One sleeve was revised for periprosthetic fracture.
Conclusion: Metaphyseal cones and sleeves offer equally durable survivorship in revision TKA. PJI was the most common mode of implant failure in this series. Importantly, no cases of cone or sleeve aseptic loosening were observed.
Keywords: failed total knee arthroplasty; metaphyseal bone loss; metaphyseal cones; metaphyseal sleeves; revision total knee arthroplasty.
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.