title: The classic: total condylar knee replacement in patients who have rheumatoid arthritis. A ten-year follow-up study. 1990.
abstract: Eighty knee replacements with a total condylar prosthesis in patients who had rheumatoid arthritis were followed for ten years. At ten years, nineteen knees needed revision and sixty-one prostheses were still functioning. The major reasons for revision were loosening of the tibial component or late bacteremic seeding from another site. Radiolucency at the bone-cement interface adjacent to the tibial component was statistically related to malposition of the tibial component. According to the system of The Hospital for Special Surgery, the mean scores were 64 points preoperatively and 85 points postoperatively. Synovitis recurred in only 3 per cent of the knees. When revision, pain, or radiographic evidence of loosening were considered an indication of failure, the ten-year cumulative survival was 75 per cent.
authors.affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Long Island Jewish Medical Center Campus for the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New Hyde Park, NY, 11042, USA, dick.brand@clinorthop.org.
authors.forename: Richard S
authors.initials: RS
authors.lastname: Laskin
mesh_terms: D001172:Arthritis, Rheumatoid / Q000266:history* / Q000601:surgery; D019645:Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / Q000266:history*; D049673:History, 20th Century; D006801:Humans; D020370:Osteoarthritis, Knee / Q000266:history* / Q000601:surgery
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986 Apr;(205):93-9
references.pmid: 3698397
references.citation: Orthop Clin North Am. 1989 Jan;20(1):79-88
references.pmid: 2919082
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1981 Jan;63(1):29-35
references.pmid: 7451524
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976 Oct;(120):149-54
references.pmid: 975650
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 1987;2(3):233-9
references.pmid: 3668553
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1982;64(5):579-82
references.pmid: 7142266
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1979 Mar;61(2):173-80
references.pmid: 422602
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1986 Nov;68(5):795-803
references.pmid: 3782249
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988 Jul;70(6):802-11
references.pmid: 3392077
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986 Apr;(205):43-8
references.pmid: 3698391
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Nov;(236):72-81
references.pmid: 3180588
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 1986;1(1):63-9
references.pmid: 3559578
references.citation: Int Orthop. 1984;8(1):61-5
references.pmid: 6480189
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989 Jan;(238):167-73
references.pmid: 2910597
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Jan;(226):6-13
references.pmid: 3335108
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1977 Jan;59(1):77-9
references.pmid: 833180
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1983 Jun;65(5):619-28
references.pmid: 6853567