The First Stage of Knee Revision Arthroplasty in Periprosthetic Infection with Replacement of a Large Defect Double Cementing Method: A Case Report

2023

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.2147/imcrj.s420109
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Aim: Large bone defects in patients with chronic deep periprosthetic knee infection is a major problem. It is widely accepted that bone defects filling with polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) cement could be used only in selected cases of small bone defects (up to 5 mm) and less than 50% of articular surface due to multiple reasons: risk of thermal bone damage, inadequate cement pressurization and bone cement shrinkage, etc. Staged cementing for preventing bone heating and over negative effects of cementing on a thick layer of bone cement has limited support in the literature. Case Presentation: We present the case of 4.5 years follow up after temporary-permanent spacer implantation in a 63-year-old male with chronic deep knee PJI and tibial AORI type 3 bone defect reconstructed via double cementing method. Results: Method of double (staged) cementing used for reconstruction of epiphyseal tibial bone defect in a patient with fistula form of knee PJI shows excellent clinical results at 4.5 years follow up.