Open Access
Volume 7, 2021
Article Number 45
Number of page(s) 8
Section Knee
Published online 10 September 2021
  1. Klasan A, Magill P, Frampton C, Young SW (2021) Factors predicting repeat revision and outcome after aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty: results from the New Zealand Joint Registry. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 29(2), 579–585. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Le DH, Goodman SB, Maloney WJ, Huddleston JI (2014) Current modes of failure in TKA: Infection, instability, and stiffness predominate. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472, 2197–2200. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Nett MP, Long WJ, Scuderi GR (2009) Principles of revision total knee arthroplasty. Tech Knee Surg 8, 144–153. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Mabry TM, Vessely MB, Schleck CD, et al. (2007) Revision total knee arthroplasty with modular cemented stems. J Arthroplasty 22, 100–105. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Yang J-H, Yoon J-R, Oh C-H, Kim T-S (2012) Primary total knee arthroplasty using rotating-hinge prosthesis in severely affected knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20, 517–523. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Kim Y-H, Kim J-S (2009) Revision total knee arthroplasty with use of a constrained condylar knee prosthesis. J Bone Jt Surg 91, 1440–1447. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hossain F, Patel S, Haddad FS (2010) Midterm assessment of causes and results of revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468, 1221–1228. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Lim JBT, Pang HN, Tay KJD, et al. (2020) Increased constraint of rotating hinge knee prosthesis is associated with poorer clinical outcomes as compared to constrained condylar knee prosthesis in total knee arthroplasty. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 30, 529–535. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Luttjeboer JS, Bénard MR, Defoort KC, et al. (2016) Revision total knee arthroplasty for instability – outcome for different types of instability and implants. J Arthroplasty 31, 2672–2676. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Shen C, Lichstein PM, Austin MS, et al. (2014) Revision knee arthroplasty for bone loss: Choosing the right degree of constraint. J Arthroplasty 29, 127–131. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Farfalli GL, Aponte-Tinao LA, Ayerza MA, et al. (2013) Comparison between constrained and semiconstrained knee allograft-prosthesis composite reconstructions. Sarcoma 2013, 489652. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Fuchs S, Sandmann C, Gerdemann G, et al. (2004) Quality of life and clinical outcome in salvage revision total knee replacement: hinged vs. total condylar design. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 12, 140–143. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Hwang S-C, Kong J-Y, Nam D-C, et al. (2010) Revision total knee arthroplasty with a cemented posterior stabilized, condylar constrained or fully constrained prosthesis: A minimum 2-year follow-up analysis. Clin Orthop Surg 2, 112–120. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Vasso M, Beaufils P, Schiavone Panni A (2013) Constraint choice in revision knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop (SICOT) 37, 1279–1284. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Pour AE, Parvizi J, Slenker N, et al. (2007) Rotating hinged total knee replacement: Use with caution. J Bone Jt Surg 89, 1735–1741. [Google Scholar]
  16. Barrack RL (2001) Evolution of the rotating hinge for complex total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 392, 292–299. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Engh GA, Ammeen DJ (1999) Bone loss with revision total knee arthroplasty: Defect classification and alternatives for reconstruction. Instr Course Lect 48, 167–175. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Noble PC, Scuderi GR, Brekke AC, et al. (2012) Development of a new knee society scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470, 20–32. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Gomes LS, Bechtold JE, Gustilo RB (1988) Patellar prosthesis positioning in total knee arthroplasty. A roentgenographic study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 236, 72–81. [Google Scholar]
  20. Stevens JM, Clement ND, MacDonald D, et al. (2019) Survival and functional outcome of revision total knee arthroplasty with a total stabilizer knee system: Minimum 5 years of follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 29, 1511–1517. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kouk S, Rathod PA, Maheshwari AV, Deshmukh AJ (2018) Rotating hinge prosthesis for complex revision total knee arthroplasty: A review of the literature. J Clin Orthop Trauma 9, 29–33. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Springer BD, Hanssen AD, Sim FH, Lewallen DG (2001) The kinematic rotating hinge prosthesis for complex knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 398, 283–291. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Joshi N, Navarro-Quilis A (2008) Is there a place for rotating-hinge arthroplasty in knee revision surgery for aseptic loosening? J Arthroplasty 23, 1204–1211. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Yoon J-R, Cheong J-Y, Im J-T, et al. (2019) Rotating hinge knee versus constrained condylar knee in revision total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis. PLoS One 14, e0214279. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Luque R, Rizo B, Urda A, et al. (2014) Predictive factors for failure after total knee replacement revision. Int Orthop (SICOT) 38, 429–435. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. Schmidt A, Batailler C, Lording T, et al. (2020) Why reintervention after total knee arthroplasty fails? A consecutive cohort of 1170 surgeries. J Arthroplasty 35, 2550–2560. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.