Reliability and utility of the new Belt et al. classification for revision of infected total knee arthroplasty

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1007/s00402-025-05769-0
B. D. Bulzacki Bogucki, V. Digennaro, Davide Cecchin, A. Panciera, R. Ferri, L. Benvenuti, B. Bordini, C. Faldini
{"title":"Reliability and utility of the new Belt et al. classification for revision of infected total knee arthroplasty","authors":"B. D. Bulzacki Bogucki,&nbsp;V. Digennaro,&nbsp;Davide Cecchin,&nbsp;A. Panciera,&nbsp;R. Ferri,&nbsp;L. Benvenuti,&nbsp;B. Bordini,&nbsp;C. Faldini","doi":"10.1007/s00402-025-05769-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The frequency of revisions in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is rising. Various classifications of bone defects exist, each with its own limitations. Recently, Belt et al. have proposed a new classification for TKA revisions based on X-ray imaging. We evaluated the Belt et al. classification and verified if this new classification is reliable, and if it correlates with the implant used during revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>This is a retrospective study. We reproduced the paper proposed by Belt et al. with the radiological data of all patients who underwent two stage revision for infected TKA in our institution between January 2017 and December 2022. Five different operators classified the bone defect for each patient at two time points. Subsequently, we assessed intra- and inter-operator reproducibility. We also collect the surgery data from our registry to verify if there is a correlation between augment use and epiphyseal bone defect.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>The classification proposed by Belt is reliable, and have a good reproducibility inter and intraoperator. There is no correlation between the bone defect. And the use of augment, and so this classification is usless in the prediction of the material needed in the operating room.</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The Belt at al. classification is reliable, but a classification which can predict the implant neded have to be developed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8326,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","volume":"145 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00402-025-05769-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The frequency of revisions in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is rising. Various classifications of bone defects exist, each with its own limitations. Recently, Belt et al. have proposed a new classification for TKA revisions based on X-ray imaging. We evaluated the Belt et al. classification and verified if this new classification is reliable, and if it correlates with the implant used during revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection.

Methods

This is a retrospective study. We reproduced the paper proposed by Belt et al. with the radiological data of all patients who underwent two stage revision for infected TKA in our institution between January 2017 and December 2022. Five different operators classified the bone defect for each patient at two time points. Subsequently, we assessed intra- and inter-operator reproducibility. We also collect the surgery data from our registry to verify if there is a correlation between augment use and epiphyseal bone defect.

Results

The classification proposed by Belt is reliable, and have a good reproducibility inter and intraoperator. There is no correlation between the bone defect. And the use of augment, and so this classification is usless in the prediction of the material needed in the operating room.

Conclusion

The Belt at al. classification is reliable, but a classification which can predict the implant neded have to be developed.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新Belt等人分类在感染全膝关节置换术翻修中的可靠性和实用性。
引言:全膝关节置换术(TKA)的翻修频率正在上升。骨缺损有多种分类,每种都有其局限性。最近,Belt等人提出了一种基于x射线成像的TKA修订新分类。我们评估了Belt等人的分类,并验证了这种新的分类是否可靠,以及它是否与假体周围关节感染翻修手术中使用的种植体相关。方法:回顾性研究。我们用2017年1月至2022年12月期间在我们机构接受两阶段TKA翻修的所有患者的放射学数据复制了Belt等人提出的论文。5位不同的操作人员在两个时间点对每位患者的骨缺损进行了分类。随后,我们评估了操作员内部和操作员之间的再现性。我们还从我们的注册表中收集手术数据,以验证增强使用与骨骺缺损之间是否存在相关性。结果:该分类方法可靠,具有良好的重复性。骨缺损之间没有相关性。使用增强,所以这种分类在预测手术室所需的材料时是没有用的。结论:带式分类是可靠的,但需要开发一种预测种植体所需的分类方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.00%
发文量
424
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is a rich source of instruction and information for physicians in clinical practice and research in the extensive field of orthopaedics and traumatology. The journal publishes papers that deal with diseases and injuries of the musculoskeletal system from all fields and aspects of medicine. The journal is particularly interested in papers that satisfy the information needs of orthopaedic clinicians and practitioners. The journal places special emphasis on clinical relevance. "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is the official journal of the German Speaking Arthroscopy Association (AGA).
期刊最新文献
Vascular bone tumors of the pelvis and extremities: an 18-case clinical and radiological analysis. Patient-reported outcomes after surgery for isolated radial head fractures: a systematic review. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients with Parkinson's disease. Starting up a cementless Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty practice: a prospective cohort study of 200 knees. The value of a preoperative physical therapy and home evaluation program in total joint arthroplasty.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1