Download PDF
J Knee Surg
DOI: 10.1055/a-2608-0053
Original Article

Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Mid-Flexion or Combined Mid-Flexion and Flexion Instability: Survivorship and Outcomes

Jordan S. Cohen
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
,
Praneeth K. Thota
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
,
Yixuan A. Pei
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
,
Neil P. Sheth
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

As patients place higher demand on their implants, mid-flexion instability is increasingly recognized as a contributor to dissatisfaction after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, the outcomes of revision surgery to address mid-flexion instability have not been categorized. The study cohort was composed of 52 patients who underwent revision surgery for mid-flexion or combined flexion and mid-flexion instability by a single surgeon between 2015 and 2022. The mean follow-up duration was 2.76 years. Patient characteristics, implants used, and complications were recorded. Range of motion and patient-reported outcomes (collected using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement [KOOS Jr.] and EuroQol-5 Dimensions-5 Levels [EQ-5D-5L] questionnaires) were compared before surgery and at final follow-up. Five patients (9.6%) required an additional operation. Causes of reoperations included component loosening, persistent wound drainage, recurrent instability, and arthrofibrosis. KOOS Jr. scores improved from 46 preoperatively to 60 postoperatively (p < 0.01). EQ-5D-5L scores demonstrated a reduction in pain/discomfort and an improvement in the ability to perform usual activities (p < 0.05). A trend was observed toward increased mobility (p = 0.05). The most common 30-day complications were transfusion (11.5%), readmission (11.5%), renal complications including acute kidney injury (9.6%), and wound complications (5.8%). Patients had improvements in maximum flexion and total arc of motion postoperatively (p < 0.05). This study includes the largest cohort of patients undergoing revision for mid-flexion instability and demonstrates that appropriately selected patients can have improved outcomes while maintaining their range of motion.

Keywords

revision total knee arthroplasty - mid-flexion instability - flexion instability


Publication History

Received: 03 February 2025

Accepted: 13 May 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
14 May 2025

Article published online:
12 June 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Sloan M, Premkumar A, Sheth NP. Projected volume of primary total joint arthroplasty in the U.S., 2014 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2018; 100 (17) 1455-1460
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 2 Postler A, Lützner C, Beyer F, Tille E, Lützner J. Analysis of total knee arthroplasty revision causes. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2018; 19 (01) 55
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 3 Dalury DF, Pomeroy DL, Gorab RS, Adams MJ. Why are total knee arthroplasties being revised?. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28 (8, Suppl): 120-121
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 4 Sharkey PF, Lichstein PM, Shen C, Tokarski AT, Parvizi J. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today–has anything changed after 10 years?. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (09) 1774-1778
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 5 Khan M, Osman K, Green G, Haddad FS. The epidemiology of failure in total knee arthroplasty: avoiding your next revision. Bone Joint J 2016; 98-B (1, Suppl A): 105-112
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 6 Petrie JR, Haidukewych GJ. Instability in total knee arthroplasty : assessment and solutions. Bone Joint J 2016; 98-B (1, Suppl A): 116-119
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 7 Al-Jabri T, Brivio A, Maffulli N, Barrett D. Management of instability after primary total knee arthroplasty: an evidence-based review. J Orthop Surg Res 2021; 16 (01) 729
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 8 Martin JW, Whiteside LA. The influence of joint line position on knee stability after condylar knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1990; (259) 146-156
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 9 Stambough JB, Edwards PK, Mannen EM, Barnes CL, Mears SC. Flexion instability after total knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2019; 27 (17) 642-651
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 10 Ramappa M. Midflexion instability in primary total knee replacement: A review. SICOT J 2015; 1: 24
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 11 Rodriguez-Merchan EC. Instability following total knee arthroplasty. HSS J 2011; 7 (03) 273-278
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 12 Cooper HJ, Moya-Angeler J, Bas-Aguilar MA, Hepinstall MS, Scuderi GR, Rodriguez J. Isolated polyethylene exchange with increased constraint is comparable to component revision TKA for instability in properly selected patients. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (09) 2946-2951
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 13 Fehring TK, Baird III R, Park B, Della Valle C. When polyethylene exchange is appropriate for prosthetic knee instability. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev 2019; 3 (05) e031
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 14 Yercan HS, Ait Si Selmi T, Sugun TS, Neyret P. Tibiofemoral instability in primary total knee replacement: A review. Part 1: Basic principles and classification. Knee 2005; 12 (04) 257-266
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Hannon CP, Kruckeberg BM, Lewallen DG, Berry DJ, Pagnano MW, Abdel MP. Treatment of flexion instability after primary total knee arthroplasty: Operative and nonoperative management of 218 cases. J Arthroplasty 2022; 37 (6S): S333-S341
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 16 Grayson CW, Warth LC, Ziemba-Davis MM, Michael Meneghini R. Functional improvement and expectations are diminished in total knee arthroplasty patients revised for flexion instability compared to aseptic loosening and infection. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31 (10) 2241-2246
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 17 Rajgopal A, Panjwani TR, Rao A, Dahiya V. Are the outcomes of revision knee arthroplasty for flexion instability the same as for other major failure mechanisms?. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32 (10) 3093-3097
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 18 Kannan A, O'Connell RS, Kalore N, Curtin BM, Hull JR, Jiranek WA. Revision TKA for flexion instability improves patient reported outcomes. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30 (05) 818-821
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 19 Vince K. Mid-flexion instability after total knee arthroplasty: Woolly thinking or a real concern?. Bone Joint J 2016; 98-B (1, Suppl A): 84-88
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 20 Cross MB, Nam D, Plaskos C. et al. Recutting the distal femur to increase maximal knee extension during TKA causes coronal plane laxity in mid-flexion. Knee 2012; 19 (06) 875-879
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 21 Evangelista PJ, Laster SK, Lenz NM, Sheth NP, Schwarzkopf R. A computer model of mid-flexion instability in a balanced total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (7S): S265-S269
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 22 Luttjeboer JS, Bénard MR, Defoort KC, van Hellemondt GG, Wymenga AB. Revision total knee arthroplasty for instability-outcome for different types of instability and implants. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31 (12) 2672-2676
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 23 Mehta N, Burnett RA, Kahlenberg CA, Miller R, Chalmers B, Cross MB. Mid-flexion instability after total knee arthroplasty: Diagnosis, implant design, and outcomes. Orthopedics 2023; 46 (01) e13-e19
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 24 Vince KG. The problem total knee replacement: Systematic, comprehensive and efficient evaluation. Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B (11, Supple A): 105-111
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 25 Hernandez NM, Taunton MJ, Perry KI, Mara KC, Hanssen AD, Abdel MP. The analysis of synovial fluid in total knee arthroplasties with flexion instability. Bone Joint J 2017; 99-B (11) 1477-1481
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 26 Christen B, Neukamp M, Aghayev E. Consecutive series of 226 journey bicruciate substituting total knee replacements: Early complication and revision rates. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014; 15: 395
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 27 Kunze KN, Fontana MA, MacLean CH, Lyman S, McLawhorn AS. Defining the patient acceptable symptom state for the HOOS JR and KOOS JR after primary total joint arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2022; 104 (04) 345-352
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 28 Bendich I, Tarity TD, Alpaugh K. et al. Identifying aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty diagnoses that achieve minimal clinically important difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State. J Arthroplasty 2023; 38 (07) 1309-1312
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 29 Lyman S, Lee Y-Y, McLawhorn AS, Islam W, MacLean CH. What are the minimal and substantial improvements in the HOOS and KOOS and JR versions after total joint replacement?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2018; 476 (12) 2432-2441
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 30 Joo PY, Chen AF, Richards J. et al. Clinical results and patient-reported outcomes following robotic-assisted primary total knee arthroplasty: A multicentre study. Bone Jt Open 2022; 3 (08) 589-595
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 31 Henry EB, Barry LE, Hobbins AP, McClure NS, O'Neill C. Estimation of an instrument-defined minimally important difference in EQ-5D-5L Index scores based on scoring algorithms derived using the EQ-VT Version 2 valuation protocols. Value Health 2020; 23 (07) 936-944
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 32 Nham FH, Patel I, Zalikha AK, El-Othmani MM. Epidemiology of primary and revision total knee arthroplasty: Analysis of demographics, comorbidities and outcomes from the national inpatient sample. Arthroplasty 2023; 5 (01) 18
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 33 Liodakis E, Bergeron SG, Zukor DJ, Huk OL, Epure LM, Antoniou J. Perioperative complications and length of stay after revision total hip and knee arthroplasties: An analysis of the NSQIP database. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30 (11) 1868-1871
    Search in Google Scholar