Background: Although the need for stemmed components is well accepted to improve mechanical survival in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA), the ideal fixation method and stem design remain controversial.
Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 223 patients who underwent revision TKA in whom stemmed components had not been used previously and with a mean follow-up of 61.6 months, including 108 components with fully cemented stems and 316 components with "hybrid" press-fit stems.
Results: Based on a time to event model, risk for mechanical failure was equivalent for both cemented and hybrid stems (relative risk, 0.991; P = .98). Young age was the single greatest risk factor for mechanical failure (P = .006). Although there was a trend toward increased failure with cemented stems in patients aged <65 years, there was no significant difference in risk after accounting for covariates (relative risk, 1.4; P = .50). Intramedullary canal fill, not stem length or diameter, was the strongest predictor of failure with hybrid stems, and risk was reduced by 41.2% for each additional 10% canal fill.
Conclusion: In conclusion, both cemented and hybrid modular stems are viable options in revision TKA. Surgeons should attempt to maximize canal filling of hybrid stems to obtain a solid press-fit. In addition, further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term survival of cemented stem fixation in young patients.
Keywords: aseptic loosening; cemented stem; hybrid stem; knee arthroplasty; revision knee.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.