Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Le vie d’accesso alla riprotesizzazione del ginocchio

Surgical exposures in revision total knee arthroplasty

  • Aggiornamenti
  • Published:
LO SCALPELLO-OTODI Educational

Abstract

Total knee arthroplasty is nowdays a safe and reliable procedure in order to pain relief and restore function. Despite the good outcomes in long-term follow-up, the changing in demographics and the growing of surgical procedures, will increase the number of revisions. During the approach to total knee revision, the exposure is often the first issue, which must be addressed step by step. Skin incision must be decided according to previous scars or to varus/valgus deformity. Knee joint can be exposed firstly from a standard medial/lateral parapatellar approach. After scar tissue removal, if the exposure is not sufficient, or the risk of patellar tendon rupture is serious, an extensile approach is necessary. Quadriceps snip is usually the first approach performed, because of the possibility of safe patellar eversion without extensor mechanism interruption or vascular damage. Quadriceps turndown provides to a wide joint exposure, using a “V-Y” plasty of the quadriceps tendon. Tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO) consists in the osteotomy of a bone fragment containing anterior tibial tubercle and patellar tendon, and subsequent eversion. Both quadriceps turndown both TTO are challenging procedures, and the choice of this kind of exposure must be weighed according to proper indications and potential pitfalls.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliografia

  1. Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E et al. (2007) Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89:780

    Google Scholar 

  2. Berger RA, Rosenberg AG, Barden RM et al. (2001) Long-term follow-up of the Miller-Galante total knee replacement. Clin Orthop 388:58–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Buechel FF (2002) Long-term follow-up after mobile-bearing total knee replacement. Clin Orthop 404:40–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ewald FC, Wright RJ, Poss R et al. (1999) Kinematic total knee arthroplasty: a 10- to 14-year prospective follow-up review. J Arthroplast 14:473–480

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Abdel MP, Morrey ME, Jensen MR et al. (2011) Increased long-term survival of posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements. J Bone Jt Surg Am 93:2072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cram P, Lu X, Kates SL et al. (2012) Total knee arthroplasty volume, utilization, and outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries 1991–2010. JAMA 308:1227

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E et al. (2010) The epidemiology of revision total knee arthroplasty in the United States. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hossain F, Patel S, Haddad FS (2010) Midterm assessment of causes and results of revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:1221

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH et al. (2002) Insall Award paper. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res 404:7–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sharkey PF, Lichstein PM, Shen C et al. (2014) Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today—has anything changed after 10 years? J Arthroplast 29(9):1774–1778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lazaro LE, Cross MB, Lorich DG (2014) Vascular anatomy of the patella: implications for total knee arthroplasty surgical approaches. Knee 21(3):655–660

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lynch AF, Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB (1987) Extensor mechanism complications following total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 2:135–140

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Rand JA, Morrey BF, Bryan RS (1989) Patellar tendon rupture after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 244:233–238

    Google Scholar 

  14. Laskin RS (1998) Management of the patella during revision total knee replacement arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 29:355–360

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Vasarhelyi EM, MacDonald SJ, Della Valle CJ, Vail TP (2014) Let’s do a revision total knee arthroplasty. Instr Course Lect 63:239–251

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Electricwala AJ, Amanatullah DF, Narkbunnam RI et al. (2016) Comprehensive operative note templates for primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty. Open Orthop J 10:725–731

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Abbott LC, Carpenter WF (1945) Surgical approaches to the knee joint. J Bone Jt Surg Am 27:277

    Google Scholar 

  18. Della Valle CJ, Berger RA, Rosenberg AG (2006) Surgical exposures in revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 446:59–68

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Insall J (1971) A midline approach to the knee. J Bone Jt Surg Am 53:1584

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Matsueda M, Gustilo RB (2000) Subvastus and medial parapatellar approaches in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 371:161–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Keblish PA (1991) The lateral approach to the valgus knee: surgical technique and analysis of 53 cases with over two-year follow-up evaluation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 271:52–62

    Google Scholar 

  22. Keblish PA (2003) The lateral approach for total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 16:62–68

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Keblish PA (1985) Valgus deformity in total knee arthroplasty: the lateral retinacular approach. Orthop Trans 9:28–39

    Google Scholar 

  24. Apostolopoulos AP, Nikolopoulos DD, Polyzois I et al. (2010) Total knee arthroplasty in severe valgus deformity: interest of combining a lateral approach with a tibial tubercle osteotomy. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 96:777–784

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Garvin KL, Scuderi G, Insall JN (1995) Evolution of the quadriceps snip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 321:131–137

    Google Scholar 

  26. Coonse KD, Adams JD (1943) A new operative approach to the knee joint. Surg Gynecol Obstet 77:344

    Google Scholar 

  27. Trousdale RT, Hanssen AD, Rand JA et al. (1993) V-Y quadricepsplasty in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 286:48–55

    Google Scholar 

  28. Windsor RE, Insall JN (1988) Exposure in revision total knee arthroplasty: the femoral peel. Tech Orthop 3:1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Barrack RL, Smith P, Munn B (1998) Comparison of surgical approaches in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 356:16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Smith PN, Parker DA, Gelinas J (2004) Radiographic changes in the patella following quadriceps turndown for revision total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 19:714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Dolin MG (1983) Osteotomy of the tibial tubercle in total knee replacement. J Bone Jt Surg 65:704–714

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Whiteside LA, Ohl MD (1990) Tibial tubercle osteotomy for exposure of the difficult total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 206:6–9

    Google Scholar 

  33. Whiteside LA (1995) Exposure in difficult total knee arthroplasty using tibial tubercle osteotomy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 321:32–35

    Google Scholar 

  34. Young CF, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH (2008) Tibial tubercle osteotomy in total knee arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplast 23:371–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Caldwell PE, Bohlen BA, Owen JR et al. (2004) Dynamic confirmation of fixation techniques of the tibial tubercle osteotomy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 424:173–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Zonnenberg CB, van den Bekerom, MP, de Jong, T et al. (2014) Tibial tubercle osteotomy with absorbable suture fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty: a report of 23 cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 134:667–672

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Davis K, Caldwell P, Wayne J et al. (2000) Mechanical comparison of fixation techniques for the tibial tubercle osteotomy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 380:241–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. S.C. Chirurgia Protesica, Ospedale Santa Corona, Pietra Ligure, SV, Italia

    Andrea Camera

  2. U.O. Clinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italia

    Stefano Biggi & Stefano Divano

Authors
  1. Andrea Camera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefano Biggi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stefano Divano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Camera.

Ethics declarations

Conflitto di interesse

Gli autori A. Camera, S. Biggi e S. Divano dichiarano di non avere alcun conflitto di interesse.

Consenso informato e conformità agli standard etici

Tutte le procedure descritte nello studio e che hanno coinvolto esseri umani sono state attuate in conformità alle norme etiche stabilite dalla dichiarazione di Helsinki del 1975 e successive modifiche. Il consenso informato è stato ottenuto da tutti i pazienti inclusi nello studio.

Human and Animal Rights

L’articolo non contiene alcuno studio eseguito su esseri umani e su animali da parte degli autori.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Camera, A., Biggi, S. & Divano, S. Le vie d’accesso alla riprotesizzazione del ginocchio. LO SCALPELLO 31, 123–126 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11639-017-0208-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11639-017-0208-x

Search

Navigation