Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bildgebende Diagnostik bei der Revisionsendoprothetik des Kniegelenks

  • Chapter
Revisionsendoprothetik des Kniegelenks

  • 1366 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Die Notwendigkeit für Revisionseingriffe bei endoprothetisch versorgten Kniegelenken wird bis zum Jahr 2015 auf das Doppelte der heutigen Zahl geschätzt [1]. Daraus ergibt sich die Forderung an die bildgebende Diagnostik, durch exakte Dokumentation der Ursachen und klare Abgrenzung zu normalen postoperativen Erscheinungsbildern zur Indikationsstellung eines Revisionseingriffs beizutragen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M (2007) Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:780–785

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Weissman B, Dalinka M, Daffner R et al. (2006)Imaging after Total Knee Arthroplasty Appropriateness Criteria. In: American College of Radiology (ACR)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Crymes WB Jr, Demos H, Gordon L (2004) Detection of musculoskeletal infection with 18F-FDG PET: review of the current literature. J Nucl Med Technol 32:12–15

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Zoccali C, Teori G, Salducca N (2009) The role of FDG-PET in distinguishing between septic and aseptic loosening in hip prosthesis: a review of literature. Int Orthop 33:1–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Rosenthall L (1997) Hip and knee prostheses: evaluation of the natural history of periprosthetic bone changes. Semin Nucl Med 27:346–354

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Berger RA, Crossett LS, Jacobs JJ, Rubash HE (1998) Malrotation causing patellofemoral complications after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 144–153

    Google Scholar 

  7. Glaser D, Lotke P (2000) Cost-effectiveness of immediate postoperative radiographs after uncomplicated total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective and prospective study of 750 patients. J Arthroplasty 15:475–478

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Moskal JT, Diduch DR (1998) Postoperative radiographs after total knee arthroplasty: a cost-containment strategy. Am J Knee Surg 11:89–93

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ververeli PA, Masonis JL, Booth RE, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH (1996) Radiographic cost reduction strategy in total joint arthroplasty. A prospective analysis. J Arthroplasty 11:277–280

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lee AJ, Lim SS, Kong Y, DeLisa JA (2001) Cost-effectiveness of screening x-rays at admission to acute rehabilitation after joint replacement surgery: a retrospective chart review. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 80:276–279

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Sofka CM, Potter HG, Figgie M, Laskin R (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging of total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 129–135

    Google Scholar 

  12. Frühwald F, Imhof H, Kletter K (2006) Orientierungshilfe Radiologie. Anleitung zum optimalen Einsatz der klinischen Radiologie, 3. Aufl. Verlag der Österreichischen Ärztekammer, Wien

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mühlenweg M, Schaefers G, Trattnig S (2008) Sicherheitsaspekte in der Hochfeld-Magnetresonanztomographie. Radiologe 48:258–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kanekasu K, Kondo M, Kadoya Y (2005) Axial radiography of the distal femur to assess rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 434:193–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Duryea J, Grainger AJ, Hide IG, Genant HK, Campbell RS (2001) Fully automated software to monitor wear in prosthetic knees using fluoroscopic images. Eur Radiol 11:2184–2187

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Jamali AA (2009) Digital templating and preoperative deformity analysis with standard imaging software. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:2695–2704

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jarm T, Kramar P, Zupanic A, Frigo C, Pavan EE (2007) ( Musculoskeletal Modeling to Provide Muscles and Ligaments Length Changes during Movement for Orthopaedic Surgery Planning. In: Magjarevic R, Nagel JH (eds) 11th Mediterranean Conference on Medical and Biomedical Engineering and Computing 2007. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, S. 292–295

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Trickett RW, Hodgson P, Forster MC, Robertson A (2009) The reliability and accuracy of digital templating in total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91:903–906

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Mintz AD, Pilkington CA, Howie DW (1989) A comparison of plain and fluoroscopically guided radiographs in the assessment of arthroplasty of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 71:1343–1347

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Hide IG, Grainger AJ, Wallace IW, Hui A, Campbell RS (2000) A radiological technique for the assessment of wear in prosthetic knee replacements. Skeletal Radiol 29:583–586

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Wheeless CR (2009) Wheeless' Textbook of Orthopaedics. In: Duke Orthopaedics, New York

    Google Scholar 

  22. Williams D, Taylor A, McLardy-Smith P (2009) Revision arthroplasty: an update. Skeletal Radiol 38:1031–1036

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Berger RA, Rubash HE, Seel MJ, Thompson WH, Crossett LS (1993) Determining the rotational alignment of the femoral component in total knee arthroplasty using the epicondylar axis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 286: 40–47

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Victor J (2009) Rotational alignment of the distal femur: a literature review. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 95:365–372

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Weissman B (2009) Imaging of Total Joint Replacement. In: Weissman B (ed) Imaging of Arthritis and Metabolic Bone Disease. Sounders Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 560–597

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Ahmad R, Kumar GS, Katam K, Dunlop D, Pozo JL (2009) Significance of a »hot patella« in total knee replacement without primary patellar resurfacing. Knee 16:337–340

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Ewald FC (1989) The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248: 9–12

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bach CM, Biedermann R, Goebel G, Mayer E, Rachbauer F (2005) Reproducible assessment of radiolucent lines in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 434:183–188

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Baldini A, Anderson JA, Zampetti P, Pavlov H, Sculco TP(2006) A new patellofemoral scoring system for total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 452:150–154

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Reish TG, Clarke HD, Scuderi GR, Math KR, Scott WN (2006) Use of multi-detector computed tomography for the detection of periprosthetic osteolysis in total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 19:259–264

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Brown EC 3rd, Clarke HD, Scuderi GR (2006) The painful total knee arthroplasty: diagnosis and management. Orthopedics 29:129–136; quiz 137–128

    Google Scholar 

  32. Smith SL, Wastie ML, Forster I (2001) Radionuclide bone scintigraphy in the detection of significant complications after total knee joint replacement. Clin Radiol 56:221–224

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Shastri S, Jacoby SM (2002) Insall Award paper. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res 404: 7–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universitätsklinik für Orthopädie /Radiologie, Medical Univ. Wien, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Österreich

    Prof. Dr. Franz Kainberger & Prof. Dr. A. Giurea

  2. Universitätsklinik für Nuklearmedizin, AKH, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Österreich

    Prof. Dr. Kurt Kletter

Authors
  1. Prof. Dr. Franz Kainberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prof. Dr. A. Giurea
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Prof. Dr. Kurt Kletter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Klinikum Wels – Grieskirchen, Grieskirchner Straße 42, 4600, Wels, Österreich

    Klemens Trieb

  2. Orthopädsche Klinik Braunschweig, Herzogin Elisabeth Hospital, Leipziger Str. 24, 38124, Braunschweig, Germany

    Karl-Dieter Heller

  3. Klinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Str. 25, 53105, Bonn, Germany

    Dieter C. Wirtz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kainberger, F., Giurea, A., Kletter, K. (2011). Bildgebende Diagnostik bei der Revisionsendoprothetik des Kniegelenks. In: Trieb, K., Heller, KD., Wirtz, D.C. (eds) Revisionsendoprothetik des Kniegelenks. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16123-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16123-0_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-16122-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-16123-0

  • eBook Packages: Medicine (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation