Background: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) offers significant relief for advanced knee osteoarthritis. With an aging population, TKA procedures are increasing, leading to a higher demand for revision surgeries. Rotating-hinge knee (RHK) prostheses have emerged as a solution for complex revisions, but the long-term durability of RHK prostheses and their effectiveness in infection-related revisions remain controversial. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the mid- to long-term clinical and survivorship outcomes of a single-design rotating hinge knee (SDRHK) system in revision TKA, comparing patients revised for infection with those revised for noninfectious causes.
Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 110 patients who underwent revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) with a SDRHK system from 2004 to 2023, with an average follow-up of 11.3 years. Patients were divided into an infection group (n = 51) and a noninfection group (n = 59) for comparative analysis. Preoperative diagnostic arthrocentesis was performed to evaluate synovial cell count, leukocyte differential, and microorganisms. Functional outcomes were assessed using Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee score, range of motion (ROM), and Knee Society Score (KSS). Study outcomes included prosthesis survival, mechanical failure, and complications. Data were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis, t test, and χ2 test, with statistical significance set at p ≤ 0.05.
Result: The infection group experienced symptom onset significantly earlier than the noninfection group (18.8 vs. 50 months, p = 0.003), had a shorter initial prosthesis lifespan (32.7 vs. 66.8 months, p = 0.001), and underwent more surgeries before revision (2.6 vs. 1.6, p = 0.004). Microbiological analysis indicated that coagulase-negative staphylococci and Staphylococcus aureus were the most commonly isolated pathogens. The 5- and 10-year prosthesis survival rates in the infection group were 78.4% and 71%, respectively, while those in the noninfection group were 83.1% and 74.6%. At the latest follow-up, survival rates for the two groups were 68.6% and 71.2%, showing similar outcomes. Functional scores in both groups improved postoperatively, with no significant differences in HSS, ROM, or KSS scores between the groups.
Conclusion: This study highlights the important value of RHK prostheses in the treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after TKA. Despite challenges such as earlier symptom onset, shorter prosthesis lifespan, and higher complication rates in the infection group, their functional outcomes and prosthesis survival rates were comparable to those of the noninfection group, further validating the effectiveness of RHK prostheses. These findings provide useful references for clinical management of PJI and underscore the importance of continued innovation in revision techniques.
| [1] |
A. J. Carr, O. Robertsson, S. Graves, et al., “Knee Replacement,” Lancet 379, no. 9823 (2012): 1331–1340.
|
| [2] |
J. W. Li, Y. S. Ma, and L. K. Xiao, “Postoperative Pain Management in Total Knee Arthroplasty,” Orthopaedic Surgery 11, no. 5 (2019): 755–761.
|
| [3] |
H. E. Matar, B. V. Bloch, and P. J. James, “Satisfactory Medium- to Long-Term Outcomes of Cemented Rotating Hinge Prosthesis in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty,” Bone & Joint Open 4, no. 10 (2023): 776–781.
|
| [4] |
L. Isaac, S. Benjamin, P. Paraskevi Vivian, et al., “Analyzing the Burden of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in the United States Between 2009 and 2016,” Journal of Knee Surgery 36, no. 2 (2023): 121–131.
|
| [5] |
H. Shaho, P J M.-v. Mheen, L. K. Bart, G. H. H. N. Rob, and G. P. Bart, “RSA-Tested TKA Implants on Average Have Lower Mean 10-Year Revision Rates Than Non-RSA-Tested Designs,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 478, no. 6 (2020): 1232–1241.
|
| [6] |
E. M. Hosam, V. B. Benjamin, and J. Peter, “High Survivorship of Short-Cemented Femoral Stems in Condylar Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Without Significant Metaphyseal Bone Loss: Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up,” Journal of Arthroplasty 36 (2021): 3543–3550.
|
| [7] |
O. Obiegbu Henry and U. Katchy Amechi, “Distal Femoral Replacement in Complex Revision Knee Arthroplasty,” Nigerian Postgraduate Medical Journal 27 (2020): 143–146.
|
| [8] |
T. C. Xiao, K. Shane, S. G. Brandon, et al., “Risk Factors for Peripheral Nerve Injury Following Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in 132,960 Patients,” Journal of Arthroplasty 39 (2023): 1031–1035.
|
| [9] |
K. Shalen, R. Parthiv, V. M. Aditya, and J. D. Ajit, “Rotating Hinge Prosthesis for Complex Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Review of the Literature,” Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma 9 (2018): 29–33.
|
| [10] |
M. Schlechter, C. Theil, G. Gosheger, et al., “Good Mid-Term Implant Survival of a Novel Single-Design Rotating-Hinge Total Knee Arthroplasty,” Journal of Clinical Medicine 12, no. 19 (2023): 6113.
|
| [11] |
K. Vertesich, K. Staats, C. Böhler, R. Koza, R. Lass, and A. Giurea, “Long Term Results of a Rotating Hinge Total Knee Prosthesis With Carbon-Fiber Reinforced Poly-Ether-Ether-Ketone (CFR-PEEK) as Bearing Material,” Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 10 (2022): 845859.
|
| [12] |
S. Chao, M. L. Paul, S. A. Matthew, F. S. Peter, and P. Javad, “Revision Knee Arthroplasty for Bone Loss: Choosing the Right Degree of Constraint,” Journal of Arthroplasty 29 (2014): 127–131.
|
| [13] |
F. Houfani, D. Mainard, B. Rubens-Duval, P. E. Papin, G. Pasquier, and M. Ehlinger, “Rotating-Hinge Prosthesis for Aseptic Revision Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicentre Retrospective Study of 127 Cases With a Mean Follow-Up of Five Years,” Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Surgery & Research 107, no. 3 (2021): 102855.
|
| [14] |
R. F. Yasser, T. Rishi, and A. F. Henry, “Intermediate-Term Results of 142 Single-Design, Rotating-Hinge Implants: Frequent Complications May Not Preclude Salvage of Severely Affected Knees,” Journal of Arthroplasty 30 (2015): 2173–2180.
|
| [15] |
C. Étienne, G. Antoine, E. Matthieu, et al., “Complications and Failures of Non-Tumoral Hinged Total Knee Arthroplasty in Primary and Aseptic Revision Surgery: A Review of 290 Cases,” Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research 107 (2021): 102875.
|
| [16] |
L. B. Robert, “Evolution of the Rotating Hinge for Complex Total Knee Arthroplasty,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, no. 392 (2001): 292–299.
|
| [17] |
A. E. Pour, J. Parvizi, N. Slenker, J. J. Purtill, and P. F. Sharkey, “Rotating Hinged Total Knee Replacement: Use With Caution,” Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume 89, no. 8 (2007): 1735–1741.
|
| [18] |
C. Theil, T. Schmidt-Braekling, G. Gosheger, et al., “Acceptable Mid- to Long-Term Survival Rates and Functional Outcomes Following a Single Design Rotating Hinge Total Knee Arthroplasty,” Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 28, no. 6 (2020): 1868–1875.
|
| [19] |
Y. R. Farid, R. Thakral, and H. A. Finn, “Intermediate-Term Results of 142 Single-Design, Rotating-Hinge Implants: Frequent Complications May Not Preclude Salvage of Severely Affected Knees,” Journal of Arthroplasty 30, no. 12 (2015): 2173–2180.
|
| [20] |
C. Umberto, P. A. Matthew, I. P. Kevin, C. M. Kristin, G. L. David, and D. H. Arlen, “Long-Term Results After Total Knee Arthroplasty With Contemporary Rotating-Hinge Prostheses,” Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 99 (2017): 324–330.
|
| [21] |
P. M. James and A. E. Gerard, “Constraint in Total Knee Arthroplasty: When and What?,” Journal of Arthroplasty 18 (2003): 51–54.
|
| [22] |
G. Thorsten, K. Daniel, and H. Carl, “The Role of Hinges in Primary Total Knee Replacement,” Bone & Joint Journal 96-B (2014): 93–95.
|
| [23] |
J. Parvizi, T. L. Tan, K. Goswami, et al., “The 2018 Definition of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infection: An Evidence-Based and Validated Criteria,” Journal of Arthroplasty 33, no. 5 (2018): 1309–1314.
|
| [24] |
C. C. Tubb, G. G. Polkowksi, and B. Krause, “Diagnosis and Prevention of Periprosthetic Joint Infections,” Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 28, no. 8 (2020): e340–e348.
|
| [25] |
Z. Gao, Y. Du, S. Piao, J. Sun, X. Li, and Y. Zhou, “Comparison Between the Staphylococci Aureus and Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci Infected Total Joint Arthroplasty Treated by Two-Stage Revision: A Retrospective Study With Two Year Minimum Follow-Up,” Journal of Orthopaedic Science 24, no. 1 (2019): 109–115.
|
| [26] |
M. Ohlmeier, F. Alrustom, M. Citak, J. Salber, T. Gehrke, and J. Frings, “What Is the Mid-Term Survivorship of Infected Rotating-Hinge Implants Treated With One-Stage-Exchange?,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 479, no. 12 (2021): 2714–2722.
|
| [27] |
M. J.-W. Chen, J.-F. Hung, C.-H. Chang, S.-H. Lee, H.-N. Shih, and Y.-H. Chang, “Periprosthetic Knee Infection Reconstruction With a Hinged Prosthesis: Implant Survival and Risk Factors for Treatment Failure,” Knee 27, no. 3 (2020): 1035–1042.
|
| [28] |
S. Doski, A. Sebastiao, and P. Thayaparan, “The Investigation and Management of Peri-Prosthetic Joint Infection After Total Knee Arthroplasty: An Update Based on the Latest British Orthopaedic Association Standard and Speciality Standard Guidelines,” Cureus 16, no. 11 (2024): e73315.
|
| [29] |
X. Wang, X. Li, C. Wang, et al., “Stability of Three-Dimensional Printed Custom-Made Metaphyseal Cone for Tibial Bone Defects Reconstruction: A Finite Element Analysis and Biomechanical Study,” Orthopaedic Surgery 15, no. 11 (2023): 2937–2946.
|
| [30] |
C. J. Sanchez, C. L. Ward, D. R. Romano, et al., “Staphylococcus aureus Biofilms Decrease Osteoblast Viability, Inhibits Osteogenic Differentiation, and Increases Bone Resorption In Vitro,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 14 (2013): 187.
|
| [31] |
J. Parvizi, K. Azzam, E. Ghanem, M. S. Austin, and R. H. Rothman, “Periprosthetic Infection due to Resistant Staphylococci: Serious Problems on the Horizon,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 467, no. 7 (2009): 1732–1739.
|
| [32] |
E. A. Masters, B. F. Ricciardi, K. L. M. Bentley, T. F. Moriarty, E. M. Schwarz, and G. Muthukrishnan, “Skeletal Infections: Microbial Pathogenesis, Immunity and Clinical Management,” Nature Reviews Microbiology 20, no. 7 (2022): 385–400.
|
| [33] |
R. Patel, “Periprosthetic Joint Infection,” New England Journal of Medicine 388, no. 3 (2023): 251–262.
|
| [34] |
M. Schnetz, L. Ewald, T. Jakobi, A. Klug, R. Hoffmann, and Y. Gramlich, “Use of Hinged Implants for Multi-Stage Revision Knee Arthroplasty for Severe Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Remission Rate and Outcomes After a Minimum Follow-Up of Five Years,” Journal of Arthroplasty 40, no. 1 (2025): 218–226.
|
| [35] |
B. J. H. Frank, A. Aichmair, S. Simon, G. M. Schwarz, M. Dominkus, and J. G. Hofstaetter, “Analysis of Culture Positive First and Second Stage Procedures in Periprosthetic Knee and Hip Joint Infections,” Journal of Arthroplasty 36, no. 6 (2021): 2158–2164.
|
| [36] |
L. Drago, E. De Vecchi, M. Bortolin, L. Zagra, C. L. Romanò, and L. Cappelletti, “Epidemiology and Antibiotic Resistance of Late Prosthetic Knee and Hip Infections,” Journal of Arthroplasty 32, no. 8 (2017): 2496–2500.
|
| [37] |
U. Cottino, M. P. Abdel, K. I. Perry, K. C. Mara, D. G. Lewallen, and A. D. Hanssen, “Long-Term Results After Total Knee Arthroplasty With Contemporary Rotating-Hinge Prostheses,” Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume 99, no. 4 (2017): 324–330.
|
| [38] |
J. R. Yoon, J. Y. Cheong, J. T. Im, P. S. Park, J. O. Park, and Y. S. Shin, “Rotating Hinge Knee Versus Constrained Condylar Knee in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis,” PLoS One 14, no. 3 (2019): e0214279.
|
| [39] |
J. von Hintze, M. Niemeläinen, H. Sintonen, J. Nieminen, and A. Eskelinen, “Outcomes of the Rotating Hinge Knee in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty With a Median Follow-Up of 6.2 Years,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 22, no. 1 (2021): 336.
|
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
2026 The Author(s). Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
PDF
(1338KB)
