ABSTRACT
Background: In revision total knee arthroplasty, tibial cones have demonstrated improved longevity and reduced incidence of aseptic loosening. Several currently available "off-the-shelf" (OTS) cone systems may not have sizes to accommodate all patient bone morphologies. Methods: Computed tomographies from one hundred primary total knee arthroplasty patients and dimensions of 4 OTS cones were obtained. Press-fit stems were positioned in 3D tibia models to fit the diaphyseal trajectory. Cones were positioned around the stem at 1, 6, and 13 mm resections measured from the trough of the medial tibial plateau, simulating proximal tibial cuts and bone loss. Tibias were examined for cortical breaching following modeled cone preparation. Results: Increased rate of breaching was observed as size and depth of the cone increased. In 2/49 (4.1%) male and 19/46 (41.3%) female tibias, cones could not be positioned without breaching. No breaches were found in 22/49 (45.0%) male and 5/46 (10.9%) female tibias. For every 1 centimeter increase in patient height, odds of breaching decreased by 12% (odds ratio: 0.88, confidence interval: 0.84, 0.92). For every size increase in cone width, odds of breaching increased by 34% (odds ratio: 1.34, confidence interval: 1.28, 1.47). Placing cones deeper also increased breaching compared to the 1 mm cut. Conclusions: In revision total knee arthroplasty, smaller OTS or custom tibial cones may be needed to fit a patient's proximal tibial geometry. This is especially true in patients not accommodated by the OTS cone sizes we tested, which impacted shorter patients and/or those with substantial bone loss requiring more tibial resection and deeper cone placement. Use of smaller or custom tibial cones should be considered where indicated.
ABSTRACT
Background: A common tibial construct for revision total knee arthroplasty includes a long diaphyseal engaging press-fit stem. Due to tibial canal bowing, compromises are often necessary to match patient anatomy when choosing stemmed implants. The objective of this study is to determine through 3-D modeling whether current implant press-fit options appropriately fit patient anatomy, or whether an alternative angle between the stem and baseplate could increase the cortical engagement of long press-fit tibial stems. Methods: Preoperative computerized tomography scans from 100 patients undergoing TKA were imported into an image-processing software program. Three-dimensional models were created with tibial stems placed at a fixed perpendicular angle and a custom angle to the revision tibial baseplate. Stem diameter, depth, offset, and contact surface area were measured and analyzed between the 2 groups. Results: Significantly more cortical contact, larger stem diameter, and smaller offset of the custom keel from the center of the baseplate were associated with free custom tibial stem placement vs a fixed perpendicular baseplate-stem interface (P < .001). Statistically significant differences were also found between different patient demographics. Conclusions: Custom free-angle stem placement allows for increased stem diameter and cortical contact of press-fit tibial stems compared to existing constructs that must interface with the baseplate at a 90-degree angle. Current revision tibia implants limit fixation of tibial press-fit stems and often mismatch with patient anatomy. Alternative ways to fit patient anatomy may be beneficial for patients with extreme mismatch. In the future, custom keel angles may help to resolve this problem.
