Comparable bone penetration between antibiotic-loaded and plain bone cement in total knee arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: One of the main concerns around the use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) is the potential reduction in the mechanical properties of the cement when antibiotics are admixed. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there is a difference between plain cement and ALBC in terms of radiological intrusion into the bone in total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). METHODS: Prospective randomized study of 80 consecutive patients who underwent TKA. Depending on the cement used, patients were divided into two groups by a computer-generated randomization programme: the cement without antibiotic (Group 1) or the ALBC (Group 2). Cement intrusion was measured in postoperative radiographs in eight different regions in the tibial component and six regions in the femoral component. RESULTS: The average cement intrusion was similar in both groups (p = nonsignificance [n.s.]). Group 1 (plain cement) had an average cement intrusion in the femur of 1.4 mm (±0.4) and 2.4 mm (±0.4) in the tibia. In Group 2 (ALBC), the average cement intrusion in the femur came to 1.6 (±0.5) and 2.4 mm (±0.5) in the tibia. In 80% of the patients, the cement intrusion in the tibia averaged a minimum of 2 mm, being similar in both groups (p = n.s.). CONCLUSION: There are no differences in bone intrusion when comparing plain cement to ALBC. Therefore, the use of ALBC in primary TKA may be indicated, achieving optimal bone penetration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.

Consequences of using poly-ether-ether-ketone versus traditional implant on tibial cement penetration and short-term clinical outcomes during total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK) prosthesis during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a relatively new concept. Several studies have suggested that the thickness of cement penetration during TKA may affect the stability of the implants. The present study aimed to compare the cement penetration and clinical performance between PEEK and traditional cobalt chromium molybdenum (CoCrMo) prosthesis during TKA. METHODS: This study was a randomized controlled trial with level I of evidence. A total of 48 patients were randomly assigned to either the PEEK group (n = 24) or the CoCrMo group (n = 24). Mean bone cement penetration under the tibial baseplate was assessed radiographically in four zones in the anteroposterior view and two zones in the lateral view, in accordance with the Knee Society Scoring System. Furthermore, parameters such as the Knee Society Score (KSS), visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, complications and survivorship at 1 year postoperatively were also compared. RESULTS: According to the results of this study, the mean bone cement penetration exhibited no significant difference between PEEK and CoCrMo groups (2.49 ± 0.61 mm vs. 2.53 ± 0.68 mm, p = 0.85). Additionally, there were no remarkable differences in the KSS clinical score, functional score, and VAS score between the two groups. Moreover, complications and survivorship were also statistically compared between the groups and presented no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current findings, it can be concluded that PEEK implant present similar bone cement penetration, short-term clinical outcomes, and survivorship with traditional CoCrMo implant in TKA without added complications. Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100047563).

Effects of tourniquet use on clinical outcomes and cement penetration in TKA when tranexamic acid administrated: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of a tourniquet is still controversial for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Our current study was performed to determine whether the nonuse of the tourniquet combine with tranexamic acid (TXA) application in TKA patients with end-stage osteoarthritis would accelerate the perioperative recovery rate and provide enough cement mantle thickness for implant fixation. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized controlled trial, 150 end-stage knee osteoarthritis patients receiving TKA were divided into three groups: group A (tourniquet group), group B (non-tourniquet group), and group C (tourniquet in cementation group). All enrolled patients received 3 g of intravenous TXA and 1 g topical TXA. The primary outcomes included blood loss variables and transfusion values. The secondary outcomes included VAS pain score, inflammatory factors level, range of motion, HSS score, postoperative hospital stay, and complication. Furthermore, by using a digital linear tomosynthesis technique, tibial baseplate bone cement mantle thickness was measured in four zones based on the knee society scoring system. RESULTS: No significant difference was found among the three groups with regards to total blood loss, transfusion, and complication. However, patients in group B showed lower inflammatory factors levels, shorter length of hospital stay, better range of motion, and lower postoperative pain. No significant difference was found among the three groups in four zones in terms of bone cement mantle thickness. CONCLUSIONS: For end-stage knee osteoarthritis patients, the absence of tourniquet did not appear to affect blood loss and cement penetration in TKA patients. Furthermore, less inflammation reaction and better knee function can be achieved without a tourniquet. We recommend no longer use a tourniquet in primary TKA for patients with end-stage osteoarthritis when TXA is administrated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR-INR-16009026 . LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I.

Tourniquet application does not affect the periprosthetic bone cement penetration in total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: Poor scientific evidence exists on the issue of tourniquet application during total knee arthroplasty (TKA). It has been suggested that tourniquet application might improve interdigitation of the cement into the periprosthetic bones due to relatively dry surgical field. The hypothesis of the present study was that tourniquet use did not affect the periprosthetic bone cement penetration. METHODS: The single-centre, randomized, controlled trial included 86 patients undergoing primary TKA (Clinical-Trials.gov NCT02475603). All patients meeting the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to the tourniquet (n = 43) or non-tourniquet (n = 43) group after obtaining a written informed consent. The cumulative bone cement penetration was radiologically measured in AP (seven zones) and lateral views (three zones) as defined by Knee Society Scoring System. Further parameters such as perioperative blood loss, soft tissue swelling, pain level/analgesic consumption, operative time, length of hospital stay (LOS) and complication rate were statistically compared between the groups. RESULTS: The cumulative bone cement penetration averaged 28.5 ± 1.7 mm in tourniquet versus 26.6 ± 1.6 mm in non-tourniquet groups (n.s.). The mean intraoperative blood loss was 250 ml higher in the non-tourniquet group (p = 0.0001). Patient-reported pre- to 6th-day post-operative reduction of the pain level was significantly higher in the non-tourniquet group (p = 0.003). The Morphine Equivalent Dose was higher in the Tourniquet group at discharge day (p = 0.02). Parameters such as total blood loss, soft tissue swelling, surgical time, LOS, and complication rates revealed similar results between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Tourniquet application did not influence the bone cement penetration significantly. Even though the intraoperative blood loss was reduced, the total blood loss was not affected significantly by tourniquet use. There was a tendency of higher post-operative pain and opioid analgesic requirement in the tourniquet group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.