Correlation of tibial bone defect shape with patient demographics following total knee revision

Imaging in revision total knee arthroplasty: A novel 3D classification system for tibial bone defects

PURPOSE

The primary purpose of the study was to use pre-revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) computer-tomography (CT)-images to analyse typical tibial bone defects and create a new schematic three-dimensional (3D)-classification system. The secondary purpose was to investigate the association between defect size and implant selection at the time of revision surgery.

METHODS

Eighty-four patients with preoperative CT-scans underwent revision of a primary TKA. CT-image segmentation with the 3D-Slicer Software was performed retrospectively, and a new three-dimensional classification system was used to grade tibial bone defects. The location of tibial bone defects was recorded for all cases. Volumetric 3D bone defect measurements were used to investigate the association between the bone defect volume, the indication for rTKA, and the use of modular revision components. The t-test, the Mann-Whitney-U test, and the Fisher's exact-test were used for group comparisons, and the Kruskal-Wallis test was used for multiple group comparisons.

RESULTS

The most common anatomic regions for both contained and uncontained tibial bone defects were the anteromedial epiphysis (N = 50; mean epiphyseal-defect: 5.9 cm³) and metaphysis (N = 15; mean metaphyseal-defect: 9.6 cm³). A significant association was found between patients with preoperative metaphyseal defects (N = 22) and the use of tibial augments (N = 7) (p = 0.04). The use of cones/sleeves was associated with a significantly increased 3D-CT volume of the preoperative metaphyseal bone defects (p = 0.04). Patients with osteoporosis had significantly larger volumetric defects in the metaphysis (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Our results emphasise the importance of considering the three-dimensional nature of tibial defects in rTKA. The findings suggest that an understanding of the volume of the defect size through CT imaging can predict the need for augments and cones/sleeves and, especially in patients with osteoporosis can help the surgeon identify larger metaphyseal defects and ensure optimal metaphyseal fixation through appropriate implant selection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Tibial bone defect prediction based on preoperative artefact-reduced CT imaging is superior to standard radiograph assessment

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of preoperative CT-based Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute (AORI)-grading and to correlate Computed tomography (CT)-based volumetric defect measurements with intraoperative AORI findings.

METHODS

99 patients undergoing revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) with preoperative CT-images were identified in an institutional revision registry. CT-image segmentation with 3D-Slicer Software was used to create 3D tibial bone defects which were then graded according to the AORI-classification. The AORI classification categorizes tibial defects into three types: Type I has healthy cortical and cancellous bone near the joint line, Type II involves metaphyseal bone loss affecting one or both condyles, and Type III indicates deficient metaphyseal bone with distal defects and potential damage to the patellar tendon and collateral ligament attachments. These 3D-CT gradings were compared to preoperative X-ray and intraoperative AORI grading. The Friedman test was used to investigate differences between AORI values of each measurement method. Volumetric 3D-bone defect measurements were used to investigate the relationship between AORI classification and volumetric defect size in the three anatomic zones of the tibia.

RESULTS

Substantial agreements between preoperative 3D-CT AORI and intraoperative AORI (kappa = 0.663; P < 0.01) and fair agreements between preoperative X-ray AORI and intraoperative AORI grading (kappa = 0.304; P < 0.01) were found. Moderate correlations between volume of remaining bone and intraoperative AORI grading were found in epiphysis (rS = - 0.529; P < 0.001), metaphysis (rS = - 0.557; P < 0.001) and diaphysis (rS = - 0.421; P < 0.001). Small volumetric differences between AORI I vs. AORI II defects and relatively large differences between AORI II and AORI III defects in each zone were detected.

CONCLUSION

Tibial bone defect prediction based on preoperative 3D-CT segmentation showed a substantial agreement with intraoperative findings and is superior to standard radiograph assessment. The relatively small difference in defect volume between AORI I, IIa and IIb suggests that updated CT-based classifications might hold benefits for the planning of rTKA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective Cohort Study; III.

Bone defect classifications in revision total knee arthroplasty, their reliability and utility: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There are various classification systems described in the literature for managing bone defects in revision knee arthroplasty (RTKA). We analysed the reliability and usefulness of these classification systems.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) To review and critique the various classification systems proposed for bone loss in RTKA. (2) Among all the proposed classifications which one is the most commonly used by surgeons to report their results. (3) What is the reliability of various bone defect classification systems for RTKA. In this review, we have assessed the studies validating those classifications with a detailed description of the limitations and the proposed modifications.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Pubmed/Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane databases and Web of Science databases were searched using multiple search terms and MeSH terms where possible. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were assessed for statistical parameters of reliability of a classification system.

RESULTS

We found 16 classification systems for bone defects in RTKA. Six studies were found evaluating a classification system with reporting their reliability parameters. Fifty-four studies were found which classified bone loss using AORI classification in their series. AORI classification is most commonly reported for classifying bone defects. Type T2B and F2B are the most common bone defects in RTKA. The average kappa value for AORI classification for femoral bone loss was 0.38 (0.27-0.50) and 0.76 (0.63-1) for tibial bone loss assessment.

CONCLUSION

None of the available classification systems is reliably established in determining the bone loss and treatment plans in RTKA. Among all, AORI classification is the most widely used system in clinical practice. The reliability of AORI Classification is fair for femoral bone loss and substantial for tibial bone loss.