Revision Knee Arthroplasty
Revision TKA is a complex reconstructive procedure performed to address implant failure due to infection, aseptic loosening, instability, periprosthetic fracture, or stiffness. Proper diagnosis requires a combination of clinical, radiographic, and laboratory evaluation to identify the cause of failure. Management aims to restore joint stability, mechanical alignment, and bone stock while minimizing complications. Modern evidence supports the use of modular stemmed and constrained implants to improve fixation, with either cemented or press-fit stems achieving comparable alignment outcomes. Prevention of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains crucial, and intraosseous antibiotic prophylaxis provides superior local drug concentrations and lower infection rates compared to traditional intravenous administration.
Etiology
The most common causes of TKA failure include:
Infection (PJI): The leading indication for early revision (<2 years).
Aseptic loosening: The most frequent cause of late revision (>2 years).
Instability: Secondary to ligament imbalance or component malposition.
Periprosthetic fracture: Increasing with aging and multiple prior surgeries.
Arthrofibrosis and extensor mechanism failure: Contribute to stiffness and poor function.
Epidemiological data indicate that infection and aseptic loosening together account for over two-thirds of revision cases.
Evaluation
Clinical Assessment
Pain pattern (activity-related vs. rest pain) helps distinguish mechanical failure from infection.
Examine gait, alignment, range of motion, stability, and prior incisions.
Assess swelling, warmth, and effusion for infection.
Laboratory Work-Up
ESR and CRP are first-line screening tools.
Joint aspiration for cell count, differential, and culture confirms infection per MSIS criteria.
Imaging
Radiographs: Serial AP/lateral and long-leg standing films evaluate loosening, wear, and alignment.
CT scan: Assesses component rotation, bone loss, and defect mapping.
Bone scan: May support diagnosis when loosening or infection is unclear, though nonspecific.
Surgical Management
Preoperative Planning
Meticulous evaluation of bone loss, ligament integrity, and soft-tissue envelope guides implant selection. Digital templating and long-leg alignment analysis are essential.
Fixation Strategy
Cemented vs. Press-Fit Stems:
A 2025 multicenter study found that short-cemented stems (<75 mm) achieved mechanical alignment equivalent to long-cemented or press-fit stems, with greater intraoperative flexibility and comparable hip-knee-ankle (HKA) anglesmainStem choice:
Short-cemented: ideal for controlled alignment correction and limited bone loss.
Long-cemented: preferred for poor bone quality and extensive defects.
Press-fit (hybrid): used when strong diaphyseal engagement is achievable.Metaphyseal reconstruction: Metal augments, sleeves, or cones are indicated for AORI Type 2B–3 bone defects.
Alignment Principles
Mechanical alignment remains the gold standard, targeting neutral HKA (≈180°) and symmetric coronal balance. Femoral alignment is more variable than tibial, but both achieve acceptable mechanical restoration when stems are properly seated.
Infection Prevention
.Evidence supports intraosseous antibiotic prophylaxis, which delivers higher local antibiotic concentrations in bone and fat tissue and significantly reduces PJI risk compared with intravenous dosing (OR ≈ 0.26) without increased systemic complications.
Complications
Infection: 4–7% risk, higher than primary TKA.
Neurovascular injury: Especially peroneal nerve during deformity correction.
Wound complications: Optimize skin flaps, use negative-pressure dressings when indicated.
Extensor mechanism disruption: Managed with allograft or mesh reconstruction.
Residual pain or stiffness: Expect longer recovery compared to primary TKA.
References
Giabbani N, Innocenti M, Sangaletti R, et al. Coronal alignment in revision total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of cemented vs. press-fit stems for restoring mechanical axis. Arthroplasty Today. 2025;35:101863.main
Lee S, Kang J, Moon Y, et al. Efficacy and safety of intraosseous versus intravenous antibiotic in primary and revision total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicina. 2025;61(10):1750.medicina-61-01750-v2
[Additional supporting references from J Clin Med 2024 and J Arthroplasty 2025 can be appended for infection prevention and alignment optimization.]
Type | Indications |
Posterior-stabilized | PCL deficiency |
Constrained condylar | Collateral laxity, moderate instability |
Rotating hinge | Global ligament deficiency, severe bone loss |
Megaprosthesis | Salvage for massive defects or tumor resection |
