Skip to main content
OrthoVellumOrthopaedic Exam Prep
Pricing
About OrthoVellum
OrthoVellum
A living orthopaedic atlas

Exam-focused orthopaedic references, a question bank, viva practice, and spaced-repetition revision — with every clinical claim traceable to its source. Content is educational only and is not a substitute for local supervision, clinical judgement, or institutional policy.


Library

  • Clinical Topics
  • Blog
  • Site Updates
  • Content Methodology

Company

  • About Us
  • Authors & Disclosure
  • Editorial Team
  • Editorial Policy
  • Advertising Policy

Legal

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Copyright & DMCA

Support

  • Support OrthoVellum
  • Help Center
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
Evidence. Clarity. Practice.

© 2026 OrthoVellum. For educational purposes only.

Not medical advice. Verify clinically important information against current local guidance.

TKA Revision - Tibial Component with Cones

Operative SurgeryArthroplasty
ArthroplastyIntermediateCore Procedure

TKA Revision - Tibial Component with Cones

How to revise a total knee arthroplasty with a porous metal tibial cone for AORI Type 2B/3 bone loss — the extensile exposure and component removal, reaming to bleeding bone, press-fit cone and cemented baseplate technique, stem load-sharing, and complications. advanced orthopaedic operative-surgery guide.

Procedure console
18 min
Read
0
Sections
intermediate
Level
Peer-reviewed · 2026-06-20
High-yield overview

Complex metaphyseal reconstruction for AORI Type 2B/3 bone loss · High-difficulty revision arthroplasty

AORI 2B/3The indication
Press-fit coneThe technique
2 corticesStem bypass for load sharing
90–180 minTypical duration
Critical Must-Knows
  • Porous metal tibial cones are indicated for AORI Type 2B and Type 3 bone defects where the metaphysis can no longer support a standard baseplate.
  • The cone is press-fit (cementless) into host bone to achieve biological fixation by osseointegration, while the tibial baseplate is cemented INTO the cone. Never cement the cone directly to host bone — it defeats biological fixation.
  • Ream to bleeding bone, select a cone so the trial is 2mm undersized, and aim for 60 to 70 percent surface contact with flush seating. A cone sitting 5mm proud has inadequate contact and will fail.
  • The stem bypasses the cone by two cortical diameters (typically 100 to 150mm) for diaphyseal load sharing — the Morgan-Jones three-zone fixation concept (zone 1 epiphysis, zone 2 metaphysis, zone 3 diaphysis).
  • Aseptic survivorship of metaphyseal cones is approximately 97 percent at midterm (Zanirato systematic review, 927 cones), and the Mayo series showed over 95 percent cone survival at five to nine years (Kamath).

When & Why


Indication. A painful, loose revision total knee arthroplasty with AORI Type 2B or Type 3 tibial bone loss — metaphyseal bone too damaged to support a standard baseplate — where a porous metal cone can provide biological (zone 2) fixation. The cone is the workhorse when augments alone are insufficient and a structural allograft or custom implant is not yet warranted. Primary indications - AORI Type 2B defects — damaged metaphyseal bone with both tibial condyles compromised but some structural support remaining.

  • AORI Type 3 defects — deficient metaphyseal bone with loss of structural support; both condyles lost.
  • Periprosthetic fracture with metaphyseal bone loss requiring fixation and support.
  • Failed structural allograft with a residual cavitary defect.
  • Septic revision after debridement, staged once infection is eradicated. Relative indications - AORI Type 2A with poor bone quality (osteoporosis, multiple prior revisions).
  • A hinged or constrained revision requiring enhanced tibial support. Contraindications - Absolute: active infection (stage a spacer and treat infection first), inadequate host bone for a cone press-fit (severely deficient cortices), uncorrectable vascular insufficiency, a non-ambulatory patient with low functional demand.
  • Relative: severe osteoporosis (consider cemented augments and longer stems), extensor mechanism disruption (repair or reconstruct first), medical comorbidity precluding a greater-than-two-hour operation, a patient under 50 years (consider structural allograft if young and active). Pre-operative imaging - Weight-bearing AP and lateral radiographs (full-length) — assess alignment, component position, defect extent and stem trajectory.
  • CT with 3D reconstruction — quantifies bone stock, defect morphology, cortical integrity and prior screw holes; the basis for cone templating.
  • Metal-artifact-reduction (MARS) MRI — if infection is suspected or soft-tissue and extensor-mechanism integrity must be assessed. Templating - Cone: measure the metaphyseal width on CT (mediolateral and AP) and choose a cone 2 to 5mm smaller than the metaphyseal diameter (available 35–55mm for the tibia, most common 40–50mm). Larger cones give more fixation surface but sacrifice more host bone.
  • Stem: length to bypass the cone by two cortical diameters (typically 100–150mm total), diameter to fill 80 percent of the canal at the isthmus (10–18mm). Choose cemented for poor bone or an older patient, cementless for good bone and biological fixation.
  • Augments: wedge augments for peripheral/slope defects (5–20mm) and block augments for central defects (5–15mm); plan for a minimum 10mm tibial polyethylene. The reconstruction decision. A cone is one of several ways to rebuild a deficient metaphysis — choose it deliberately:
Metaphyseal cone

Porous tantalum or titanium scaffold (80 percent porosity) giving cementless biological fixation in zone 2. Press-fit to host bone, baseplate cemented into the cone. The default for AORI 2B/3.

Metaphyseal sleeve

A diaphyseally-engaging porous sleeve giving equivalent zone-2 fixation (97.8 percent aseptic survivorship vs 97.3 percent for cones, Zanirato). Choice is driven by implant system and defect geometry, not survivorship.

Modular augments alone

Wedges and blocks cemented to the baseplate — suitable for contained peripheral defects (AORI 2A) but do not address central cavitary metaphyseal loss.

Structural allograft

Biology-friendly for very large uncontained defects in younger patients, but carries resorption and non-union risk; now largely reserved where cones or sleeves cannot gain fixation.

Custom implant / hinge

A custom triflange or distal-femoral-replacement-type prosthesis for massive bone loss, or a rotating hinge when global instability coexists.

Cemented long stem only

For the poor-bone, low-demand patient where biological fixation is not realistic — immediate stability at the cost of late loosening risk.

Setup. Supine on a radiolucent table, padded proximal-thigh tourniquet, bump under the ipsilateral hip for 15 to 20 degrees of internal rotation, C-arm from the contralateral side for cone position and stem trajectory. Laminar flow, double-gloving, pulsatile lavage (6 to 9L). Antibiotic prophylaxis: cefazolin 2g IV (3g if weight greater than 120kg) within 60 minutes, vancomycin 15mg/kg over one hour for MRSA risk or beta-lactam allergy, redose cefazolin if the case exceeds four hours. Consent specifically for the higher wound-complication and infection rates of revision surgery, stiffness, and the possibility of needing a more constrained insert or a staged second stage if infection is found.

The Operation


The goal is to remove the loose components while preserving every scrap of host bone, expose and classify the tibial defect, then rebuild the metaphysis with a press-fit porous cone that osseointegrates, locking a stemmed baseplate into it and sharing load to the diaphysis through a stem that bypasses the cone by two cortical diameters. The exposure is everything in a stiff, multiply-operated knee — it is laid out first below (and in depth on the medial parapatellar approach to the knee page).

AP knee radiograph of a revision TKA tibial component with cone
AP knee radiograph of a revision total knee replacement with a stemmed tibial component supported by a metaphyseal cone.Credit: OrthoVellum surgical illustration
Popliteal neurovascular bundle

Lies 10 to 15mm posterior to the posterior capsule at the joint line. Protect with a bent Hohmann retractor resting on bone (not soft tissue), flex the knee to relax the bundle, and avoid posterior power-burr work.

Common peroneal nerve

Posterolateral, winding around the fibular neck 30 to 40mm distal to the joint. At risk with valgus correction — release contractures slowly, limit valgus correction to gradual increments, decompress at the fibular neck if a large correction is planned.

Medial collateral ligament

Origin on the medial femoral condyle about 10mm proximal and posterior to the joint line. Preserve by subperiosteal dissection during medial exposure and avoid excessive medial stripping.

Extensor mechanism

The quadriceps tendon, patella and patellar tendon. Use an extensile approach early if the patella will not evert, protect the lateral geniculate blood supply, and avoid aggressive lateral release.

Tibial cortex

The metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction is the stress riser during removal and reaming. Avoid aggressive osteotome use, ream stems with flexible reamers in 0.5mm increments, and confirm trajectory with fluoroscopy.

Operative sequence

Step 1Skin incision and flaps
  • Use the prior midline incision (the most lateral of several scars, to preserve lateral genicular blood supply), and excise any intermediate scar en bloc with the arthrotomy rather than raising a bridge.
  • Raise full-thickness flaps only — no subcutaneous beveling — and handle skin gently with skin hooks, never crushing clamps. Skin ischaemia occurs in 8 to 12 percent of revisions.
  • Extend proximally to mid-thigh and distally to the tibial tubercle or beyond.
Step 2Exposure — extensile options (the key decision)

Attempt a standard medial parapatellar arthrotomy first. Release the medial capsule and deep MCL fibres subperiosteally and try to evert the patella with the knee flexed to 90 degrees. If the patella will not evert lateral to the midline without tension, extend the exposure rather than forcing it: - Rectus snip (preferred, lowest complication rate 2 to 3 percent): a 45-degree proximal-lateral incision 2 to 3cm long in the quadriceps tendon from the superomedial patellar pole, preserving the VMO. Repair directly at closure with a figure-of-8 of number-2 FiberWire.

  • Tibial tubercle osteotomy (severe stiffness, younger patient): a 5 to 6cm by 1.5cm osteotomy lateral to the tibial crest, cut with a microsagittal saw to 4 to 5mm depth preserving the posterior cortex, cracked with a thin osteotome, and reflected proximally with the patellar tendon. Fix at closure with 2 to 3 bicortical screws or cerclage wires.
  • V-Y quadricepsplasty (last resort, ankylosed knee in a low-demand elderly patient): an inverted V with the apex 6 to 8cm proximal to the patella, gaining 3 to 5cm of length. High complication rate (10 to 15 percent disruption); protected weight-bearing for six weeks.
Step 3Component removal — femur first
  • Disrupt the cement-bone interface with narrow osteotomes; use curved osteotomes posteriorly under direct vision to avoid the popliteal bundle.
  • An oscillating saw clears the anterior flange cement; extract the femoral component with a universal extractor.
  • Remove all cement with a high-speed burr and ultrasonic device, preserving host bone — do not gouge.
Step 4Tibial component exposure and removal
  • Flex the knee maximally and elevate the medial and lateral sleeves, preserving the MCL and LCL origins.
  • Place bent Hohmann retractors posteromedially and posterolaterally resting on bone, not soft tissue, to protect the popliteal bundle.
  • Cut the cement peripherally with a microsagittal saw, then osteotomes at the bone-cement interface working anterior to posterior; a Gigli saw reaches the posterior cement.
  • Remove the stem with flexible osteotomes down the canal (cemented) or a slotted extractor (press-fit). Gentle mallet taps only — violent impaction fractures the cortex. Periprosthetic fracture during removal occurs in 5 to 8 percent.
Step 5Cement removal and defect assessment
  • Clear all cement to bleeding bone (essential for cone osseointegration) using hand tools, burr and ultrasonic removal with pulse lavage between steps.
  • Classify the defect by AORI: Type 1 intact metaphysis (no cone), 2A one condyle damaged (augment), 2B both condyles damaged (cone indicated), 3 deficient metaphysis with loss of structural support (cone required).
Step 6Cone selection and planning
  • Porous tantalum or titanium cone, 80 percent porosity, modulus about 3 GPa (close to bone, low stress-shielding).
  • Measure the metaphyseal diameter on CT and choose a cone 2 to 5mm smaller; balance maximising contact against sacrificing healthy bone.
Step 7Metaphyseal preparation — serial reaming
  • Begin with the smallest reamer (usually 30 to 35mm) and advance in 2.5mm increments.
  • Ream to the bleeding-bone endpoint: punctate bleeding with a firm cortical rim. Non-bleeding sclerotic bone will not osseointegrate.
  • Preserve the cortical rim; avoid eccentric reaming that perforates the thin metaphyseal cortex.
Step 8Cone trial and fit assessment
  • Insert a trial cone 2mm smaller than the planned final size; rotate to optimise contact in asymmetric defects.
  • Burr high spots rather than over-reaming (preserves bone). Accept only flush seating or at most 2mm proud — a proud cone has poor contact and will fail.
Step 9Cone impaction and stability verification
  • Impact the final cone to a stable endpoint, then stress it: it must not rotate under the impactor, subside under axial load, or toggle mediolaterally.
  • Fluoroscopy confirms symmetric AP position, correct depth parallel to the joint line, and no occult fracture.
  • Target 60 to 70 percent surface contact and no micromotion.
Step 10Bone graft packing (optional)
  • Pack morselised autograft (reaming debris, preferred) or allograft chips around the cone periphery to fill gaps and enhance ingrowth.
  • Keep graft out of the cone-to-baseplate interface, where it would cause instability.
Step 11Tibial baseplate and stem insertion
  • Trial the baseplate with stem on the cone: rotation aligned to the tibial tubercle, central mediolateral position, no rocking.
  • Stem length to bypass the cone by two cortical diameters (100 to 150mm); diameter to fill 80 percent of the isthmus. Use flexible reamers that follow the canal, confirming trajectory fluoroscopically.
Step 12Stem engagement and load sharing
  • Aim for fixation in at least two of the three Morgan-Jones zones (zone 1 epiphysis via the baseplate, zone 2 metaphysis via the cone, zone 3 diaphysis via the stem), ideally all three.
  • The stem shares load with the cone and protects against subsidence if cone ingrowth is incomplete; the load fraction is implant- and construct-dependent rather than fixed.
Step 13Baseplate fixation to cone
  • Cemented technique (commonest): a thin 1 to 2mm cement mantle on the cone's superior surface, insert the baseplate with stem, hold compression 8 to 10 minutes, remove extruded cement.
  • Cementless technique: direct impaction or a central screw through the baseplate into the cone, relying on taper-lock and osseointegration.
  • A baseplate-cone gap greater than 2mm causes micromotion and failure — ensure flush contact.
Step 14Modular augments for residual defects
  • Trial then cement wedge augments (peripheral, 5 to 20mm) or block augments (central, 5 to 15mm) to the baseplate, avoiding cement at the augment-bone interface.
  • Restore the joint line: normally 25mm distal to the medial femoral epicondyle and 10mm distal to the fibular head. Elevation risks patella baja (Insall-Salvati ratio less than 0.8).
Step 15Polyethylene selection and trialing
  • Minimum 10mm polyethylene (highly cross-linked preferred); thicker inserts (12 to 25mm) for laxity or bone loss.
  • Choose constraint by ligament status: posterior-stabilised if collaterals intact, constrained condylar (CCK) for 5 to 10mm collateral laxity in extension, rotating hinge for gross instability. Avoid over-constraining.
  • Trial and assess stability, balance flexion-extension gaps within 2mm, range of motion to 110 to 120 degrees, and central patellar tracking. Lock the insert, irrigate copiously, and re-check stability.
Step 16Closure
  • Repair the medial arthrotomy with interrupted number-1 Vicryl or PDS; repair a rectus snip with figure-of-8 number-2 FiberWire; fix a tibial tubercle osteotomy with 2 to 3 bicortical screws or cerclage.
  • Confirm central patellar tracking and a strong straight-leg-raise against resistance. Close in layers over drains if dead space is a concern, with an occlusive compressive dressing.
Protect the popliteal bundle and the tibial cortex

The popliteal neurovascular bundle lies only 10 to 15mm posterior to the capsule. During femoral and tibial component removal use curved osteotomes and a posterior retractor resting on bone, keep the knee flexed, and never use a power burr posteriorly. The metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction is the stress riser for fracture — if a crack is seen or heard, stop, stabilise with cerclage cables and a longer stem (bypassing by two cortical diameters), and consider a lateral locking plate if it propagates.

Skin and extensor mechanism

Use one full-thickness flap and excise intermediate scars en bloc; handle skin with hooks only. If the patella will not evert without tension, extend the exposure early — a rectus snip is the lowest-morbidity option. Extensor mechanism rupture occurs in 1 to 2 percent of standard and 5 to 8 percent of extensile approaches and is catastrophic.

How to choose the extensile exposure

With the knee flexed to 90 degrees, attempt to evert the patella. If it will not pass lateral to the midline without tension, extend: a rectus snip for mild-to-moderate stiffness (2 to 3 percent complication rate), a tibial tubercle osteotomy for severe stiffness or patella baja in a younger patient, and a V-Y quadricepsplasty only for an ankylosed knee in a low-demand elderly patient (10 to 15 percent disruption rate).

Press-fit cone, cemented baseplate — know the two interfaces

The cone is press-fit and cementless to host bone for osseointegration; the baseplate is cemented into the cone for immediate stability. These are not contradictory — the cone-bone interface is biological, the cone-implant interface is cemented. Cementing the cone directly to host bone defeats biological fixation. Published series report near-universal radiographic osseointegration and around 97 percent aseptic cone survivorship at midterm.

Ream to bleeding bone — never accept a proud cone

Non-bleeding sclerotic bone will not osseointegrate. If you cannot reach bleeding bone with a firm cortical rim, switch to a cemented technique or structural allograft. A cone sitting 5mm proud has roughly 40 to 50 percent contact (the minimum is 60 to 70 percent), will micromove, and will subside — remove it, ream 2 to 3mm deeper or upsize 2.5mm, and if it still will not seat, abandon the cone for augments or allograft.

Aftercare & Complications


Rehabilitation | Phase | Timing | Weight-bearing | Therapy | |-------|--------|----------------|---------| | 1 | 0–6 weeks | Touch weight-bearing (allows cone osseointegration) | CPM 0–90 degrees, quadriceps sets, straight-leg raises; goal 0–90 degrees by discharge | | 2 | 6–12 weeks | Advance to weight-bearing as tolerated if radiographs stable | Progressive strengthening, proprioception, gait | | 3 | 3–6 months | Full weight-bearing, wean aids | Goal 0–110 degrees minimum, 0–120 degrees ideal | | 4 | 6 months+ | Unrestricted | Low-impact activities (golf, swimming, cycling) | If an intraoperative fracture occurred, protect with non- to partial weight-bearing for 12 weeks. Continue chemical thromboprophylaxis for 4 to 6 weeks and use multimodal analgesia (adductor canal block, paracetamol, opioids; NSAIDs short-term if renal function allows). Radiographic surveillance. AP and lateral at 6 weeks assessing for subsidence (greater than 2mm is concerning) and lucencies (progressive radiolucency greater than 2mm indicates loosening); repeat at 3 months if symptomatic, then at 6 months, 1 year, and annually. Outcomes. Knee Society Score improves roughly 40 to 50 points (about 52 to 85 in the landmark series); patient satisfaction is 70 to 80 percent, lower than primary TKA.

Approximately 97 percent

Pooled aseptic survivorship of metaphyseal cones at midterm — Zanirato systematic review (927 cones, mean 3.6 years).

Over 95 percent

Revision-free cone survival at five to nine years in the Mayo series — Kamath (66 cones, mean 70 months).

Approximately 10 percent

Periprosthetic infection — the leading reason for failure in pooled cone series, exceeding aseptic loosening.

Complications

Aseptic loosening (5–8% at 5 years)
Recognition
Progressive pain, radiolucencies greater than 2mm at the bone-cone or cone-baseplate interface, subsidence greater than 5mm, component migration
Prevention
Adequate press-fit (60–70 percent contact), ream to bleeding bone, stem bypass of 2 cortical diameters, avoid cementing the cone to host bone
Management
Revision: larger cone if bone stock allows, structural allograft or custom implant for massive loss (AORI 3), hinged prosthesis if instability coexists
Periprosthetic infection (3–5%)
Recognition
Wound drainage beyond 5–7 days, fever, aspiration WBC greater than 3000 with PMN greater than 80 percent, positive cultures, ESR greater than 30 or CRP greater than 10
Prevention
Prophylactic antibiotics, minimal operative time, copious irrigation (9L), occlusive dressing, aspirate pre-operatively if any concern
Management
Acute (less than 4 weeks): DAIR if components stable and organism sensitive. Chronic: two-stage revision (spacer 6–12 weeks then reimplantation). Suppression if non-surgical
Instability (3–5%)
Recognition
Giving way, recurrent effusions, varus-valgus laxity greater than 10mm at 20 degrees, flexion-extension gap mismatch greater than 3mm
Prevention
Appropriate constraint (CCK for 5–10mm laxity, hinge if greater than 10mm), balance gaps within 2mm, restore the joint line
Management
Exchange polyethylene to higher constraint, revise to a rotating hinge if severe, address bone loss or collateral deficiency
Periprosthetic fracture (2–4%)
Recognition
Acute pain, inability to bear weight, fracture around the cone or stem
Prevention
Gentle removal technique, sequential stem reaming in 0.5mm increments, fluoroscopy, cemented stems in osteoporotic bone, adequate stem length
Management
Stable component: cerclage cables or screws. Around the stem: longer stem bypassing the fracture by 2 cortical diameters plus possible locking plate or strut allograft. Distal to the stem: ORIF
Common peroneal nerve injury (1–2%)
Recognition
Foot drop, loss of ankle dorsiflexion, dorsal foot sensory loss
Prevention
Gradual correction of valgus, decompress at the fibular neck if correction greater than 15 degrees, monitor nerve function
Management
Observe 6 to 12 months (80 percent recover if neurapraxia), AFO for foot drop, explore or transfer if no recovery
Extensor mechanism disruption (1–2%)
Recognition
Inability to straight-leg-raise, extensor lag, palpable defect
Prevention
Extensile approach early if stiff, protect the lateral geniculate vessels, heavy-suture repair of any extensile approach
Management
Acute primary repair, augment with mesh or allograft if attenuated; chronic reconstruction with extensor-mechanism allograft or medial gastrocnemius flap
Stiffness (5–10%)
Recognition
Range of motion less than 90 degrees at 3 months, progressive flexion loss
Prevention
Adequate soft-tissue balancing, avoid joint-line elevation, early aggressive therapy
Management
Manipulation under anaesthesia at 6 to 12 weeks, arthroscopic then open arthrolysis, component revision if malalignment
Wound complication (5–10%)
Recognition
Persistent drainage beyond 7 days, dehiscence or necrosis, superficial infection
Prevention
Full-thickness flaps, excise intermediate scars, optimise diabetes and nutrition, plastic surgery if concern
Management
Oral antibiotics and local care for superficial infection; early debridement, negative-pressure therapy, gastrocnemius flap for deeper problems
Major complications of tibial cone revision TKA
ComplicationRecognitionPreventionManagement
Aseptic loosening (5–8% at 5 years)Progressive pain, radiolucencies greater than 2mm at the bone-cone or cone-baseplate interface, subsidence greater than 5mm, component migrationAdequate press-fit (60–70 percent contact), ream to bleeding bone, stem bypass of 2 cortical diameters, avoid cementing the cone to host boneRevision: larger cone if bone stock allows, structural allograft or custom implant for massive loss (AORI 3), hinged prosthesis if instability coexists
Periprosthetic infection (3–5%)Wound drainage beyond 5–7 days, fever, aspiration WBC greater than 3000 with PMN greater than 80 percent, positive cultures, ESR greater than 30 or CRP greater than 10Prophylactic antibiotics, minimal operative time, copious irrigation (9L), occlusive dressing, aspirate pre-operatively if any concernAcute (less than 4 weeks): DAIR if components stable and organism sensitive. Chronic: two-stage revision (spacer 6–12 weeks then reimplantation). Suppression if non-surgical
Instability (3–5%)Giving way, recurrent effusions, varus-valgus laxity greater than 10mm at 20 degrees, flexion-extension gap mismatch greater than 3mmAppropriate constraint (CCK for 5–10mm laxity, hinge if greater than 10mm), balance gaps within 2mm, restore the joint lineExchange polyethylene to higher constraint, revise to a rotating hinge if severe, address bone loss or collateral deficiency
Periprosthetic fracture (2–4%)Acute pain, inability to bear weight, fracture around the cone or stemGentle removal technique, sequential stem reaming in 0.5mm increments, fluoroscopy, cemented stems in osteoporotic bone, adequate stem lengthStable component: cerclage cables or screws. Around the stem: longer stem bypassing the fracture by 2 cortical diameters plus possible locking plate or strut allograft. Distal to the stem: ORIF
Common peroneal nerve injury (1–2%)Foot drop, loss of ankle dorsiflexion, dorsal foot sensory lossGradual correction of valgus, decompress at the fibular neck if correction greater than 15 degrees, monitor nerve functionObserve 6 to 12 months (80 percent recover if neurapraxia), AFO for foot drop, explore or transfer if no recovery
Extensor mechanism disruption (1–2%)Inability to straight-leg-raise, extensor lag, palpable defectExtensile approach early if stiff, protect the lateral geniculate vessels, heavy-suture repair of any extensile approachAcute primary repair, augment with mesh or allograft if attenuated; chronic reconstruction with extensor-mechanism allograft or medial gastrocnemius flap
Stiffness (5–10%)Range of motion less than 90 degrees at 3 months, progressive flexion lossAdequate soft-tissue balancing, avoid joint-line elevation, early aggressive therapyManipulation under anaesthesia at 6 to 12 weeks, arthroscopic then open arthrolysis, component revision if malalignment
Wound complication (5–10%)Persistent drainage beyond 7 days, dehiscence or necrosis, superficial infectionFull-thickness flaps, excise intermediate scars, optimise diabetes and nutrition, plastic surgery if concernOral antibiotics and local care for superficial infection; early debridement, negative-pressure therapy, gastrocnemius flap for deeper problems

Viva & Exam Focus


Mnemonic

CONESCONES — when to use a porous metal tibial cone

C
Contained/Uncontained AORI 2B/3
Defects needing metaphyseal support
O
Osseointegration potential
Biological fixation through 80 percent porosity
N
No structural allograft required
Cone removes allograft resorption risk
E
Extended metaphyseal support
Press-fit, 60 to 70 percent surface contact
S
Stem bypasses by 2 cortical diameters
Diaphyseal load sharing, prevents stress concentration
Mnemonic

STABLESTABLE — cone fixation principles

S
Serial reaming to bleeding bone
Endpoint is punctate bleeding and a firm cortical rim
T
Trial cone 2mm undersized
Trial smaller than the final cone
A
Adequate bone contact
60 to 70 percent surface area minimum
B
Baseplate-cone flush
No gap greater than 2mm
L
Load sharing with the stem
Stem bypasses the cone
E
Evaluate stability intra-operatively
No rotation, subsidence or toggle

Clinical Decision Scenarios

Practise clinical reasoning and management decisions out loud

Viva scenarioStandard
Clinical prompt

“A 68-year-old presents with pain and loosening of their tibial component 8 years after primary TKA. Radiographs show 15mm of medial tibial subsidence with both condyles compromised. How would you classify this defect and what reconstruction options would you consider?”

Viva scenarioStandard
Clinical prompt

“During cone impaction for a Type 3 tibial defect, you achieve what appears to be good press-fit stability. However, fluoroscopy shows the cone is 5mm proud relative to the metaphyseal rim. How would you address this?”

Viva scenarioStandard
Clinical prompt

“Post-operatively, a patient with a tibial cone reconstruction develops progressive pain, and radiographs at 1 year show a 2mm lucent line around the entire cone-bone interface with 3mm of subsidence compared with 6-week films. How would you manage this patient?”

Exam day cheat sheet
TKA Revision - Tibial Cone — exam-day essentials

Indication

  • AORI Type 2B (both condyles damaged) or Type 3 (deficient metaphysis) tibial bone loss
  • Also: periprosthetic fracture with metaphyseal loss, failed structural allograft, staged septic revision

Exposure (the heart)

  • Standard medial parapatellar first; extend if the patella will not evert at 90 degrees
  • Rectus snip (lowest morbidity, 2 to 3 percent), tibial tubercle osteotomy (severe stiffness, young), V-Y last resort (ankylosed, elderly)
  • Full-thickness flaps only; excise intermediate scars; protect the lateral geniculate supply

Cone technique

  • Ream to bleeding bone in 2.5mm increments, firm cortical rim
  • Trial cone 2mm undersized; target 60 to 70 percent contact, flush seating
  • Cone press-fit (cementless) to host bone; baseplate cemented INTO the cone — never cement the cone to host bone

Stem and load sharing

  • Stem bypasses the cone by 2 cortical diameters (100 to 150mm), fills 80 percent of the isthmus
  • Morgan-Jones three zones: 1 epiphysis (baseplate), 2 metaphysis (cone), 3 diaphysis (stem) — fix at least two, ideally all three

Complications (Big 4)

  • Aseptic loosening 5 to 8 percent at 5 years
  • Infection 3 to 5 percent (the leading failure mode, around 10 percent in pooled series)
  • Instability 3 to 5 percent
  • Periprosthetic fracture 2 to 4 percent

Postoperative

  • Touch weight-bearing for 6 weeks to allow osseointegration
  • Range of motion 0 to 90 degrees by discharge, 0 to 110 minimum by 3 months
  • Radiographs at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year then annual; subsidence greater than 2mm or lucencies greater than 2mm are concerning

Background & Evidence


Epidemiology. Bone loss is the defining challenge of revision TKA, and the metaphyseal cone was developed for the defects augments cannot solve — AORI Type 2B and 3 — where the metaphyseal shell can no longer support a baseplate. Tantalum and titanium porous cones exploit a high-porosity (80 percent) scaffold whose modulus (about 3 GPa) is close to bone, allowing reliable bone ingrowth (osseointegration) and ongrowth. The AORI bone-defect classification (Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute) drives the reconstruction:

1
Metaphyseal bone
Intact
Structural support
Preserved
Reconstruction
Standard revision baseplate, no cone
2A
Metaphyseal bone
Damaged, one condyle
Structural support
Partial
Reconstruction
Modular augments usually suffice
2B
Metaphyseal bone
Damaged, both condyles
Structural support
Compromised
Reconstruction
Metaphyseal cone indicated
3
Metaphyseal bone
Deficient
Structural support
Lost
Reconstruction
Cone required; consider sleeve, allograft or custom implant
AORI classification of tibial bone loss and reconstruction
AORI TypeMetaphyseal boneStructural supportReconstruction
1IntactPreservedStandard revision baseplate, no cone
2ADamaged, one condylePartialModular augments usually suffice
2BDamaged, both condylesCompromisedMetaphyseal cone indicated
3DeficientLostCone required; consider sleeve, allograft or custom implant

Key evidence. Meneghini established the technique (15 knees, AORI 2B/3, KSS 52 to 85, all osseointegrated at a mean 34 months). Kamath provided intermediate-term durability (66 cones, mean 70 months, only one aseptic loosening, revision-free cone survival over 95 percent). Long confirmed independent osseointegration with alignment restoration but showed infection as the dominant failure mode. The Zanirato systematic review pooled 927 cones and 1801 sleeves and found near-equivalent aseptic survivorship (97.3 percent vs 97.8 percent) — cones and sleeves are interchangeable, choice driven by implant system and defect geometry. Byttebier's meta-analysis (4391 knees) found no significant difference in 10-year failure between porous implants and grafting, though tantalum cones showed the largest patient-reported outcome gains.

References


Evidence

Use of porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss during revision total knee replacement

Level IV
Meneghini RM, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD • J Bone Joint Surg Am (2008)
Key Findings:
  • 15 revision TKAs (8 Type-3, 7 Type-2B AORI defects) with porous tantalum tibial cones; mean 3.5 prior knee replacements
  • Mean Knee Society clinical score improved from 52 to 85 at a mean 34 months follow-up
  • All 15 cones showed radiographic osseointegration with reactive trabeculation; no loosening or migration
Clinical implication: Landmark series establishing porous metal metaphyseal cones as a reliable, biologically-fixing option for severe (AORI 2B/3) tibial bone loss; defined the cone-press-fit / baseplate-cemented-into-cone technique.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 18171960)
Evidence

Porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss in revision knee arthroplasty: a five to nine-year follow-up

Level IV
Kamath AF, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD • J Bone Joint Surg Am (2015)
Key Findings:
  • 66 tibial cones in 63 patients (24 Type-3, 25 Type-2B, 17 Type-2A); mean 70 months follow-up (range 60 to 106)
  • Mean Knee Society Score improved from 55 to 80 (p less than 0.0001); 49 percent had a prior periprosthetic infection
  • Only one aseptic loosening; revision-free survival of the tibial cone component greater than 95 percent at latest follow-up
Clinical implication: Provides the intermediate-term durability data (5 to 9 years) for tibial cones, confirming that biologic ingrowth gives durable structural support even in heavily-revised, high-risk knees.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 25653322)
Evidence

Porous tantalum cones for large metaphyseal tibial defects in revision total knee arthroplasty: a minimum 2-year follow-up

Level IV
Long WJ, Scuderi GR • J Arthroplasty (2009)
Key Findings:
  • 16 revision TKAs with tantalum tibial cones for AORI 2A/2B/3 defects; mean 31 months follow-up, none lost
  • Reconstruction restored the joint line and a near-neutral mechanical axis (mean 5.4 degrees valgus) with radiographic osseointegration
  • Two well-fixed cones required removal for recurrent infection; the remaining 14 functioned well with no reoperation
Clinical implication: Independent (non-Mayo) confirmation that tantalum cones osseointegrate and restore alignment, while highlighting that infection — not aseptic loosening — is the dominant mode of failure.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 18823749)
Evidence

Metaphyseal cones and sleeves in revision total knee arthroplasty: two sides of the same coin? A systematic review

Level III
Zanirato A, Formica M, Cavagnaro L, Divano S, Burastero G, Felli L • Musculoskelet Surg (2020)
Key Findings:
  • Systematic review of 37 studies: 927 cones (mean 3.6 years) and 1801 sleeves (mean 4.5 years)
  • Aseptic implant survivorship 97.3 percent for cones and 97.8 percent for sleeves — statistically overlapping
  • Both provide stable metaphyseal (zone 2) fixation for AORI Type 2B and 3 defects in aseptic and septic revision
Clinical implication: Pooled evidence that cones and sleeves are near-equivalent for metaphyseal fixation; choice is driven by implant system, defect geometry and surgeon familiarity rather than a survivorship difference.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 30879231)
Evidence

Comparison of different strategies in revision arthroplasty of the knee with severe bone loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Level III
Byttebier P, Dhont T, Pintelon S, Rajgopal A, Burssens A, Victor J • J Arthroplasty (2022)
Key Findings:
  • Meta-analysis of 77 articles and 4391 knees comparing porous cones/sleeves with morselised and structural grafting
  • No significant difference in failure at 10 years between all porous implants and all grafting procedures (OR 0.91, 95 percent CI 0.70 to 1.19)
  • Tantalum cones showed the largest improvement in patient-reported outcome measures of the strategies analysed
Clinical implication: High-volume pooled data: porous metaphyseal implants are effective at midterm, but bone graft remains a defensible option in younger patients with less-constrained implants — nuance examiners reward.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 35271982)
Evidence

Early results of the use of tantalum femoral cones for revision total knee arthroplasty

Level IV
Howard JL, Kudera J, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD • J Bone Joint Surg Am (2011)
Key Findings:
  • Companion femoral cone series (24 knees) extending the porous-cone concept to the femoral side
  • Mean Knee Society Score improved from 55 to 81 at a mean 33 months
  • All cones were well-fixed radiographically with no loosening
Clinical implication: Establishes that the porous tantalum cone principle is generalisable to femoral metaphyseal defects, supporting the same press-fit / cemented-baseplate technique across the knee.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 21368080)
Evidence

Bone loss with revision total knee arthroplasty: defect classification and alternatives for reconstruction

Level V
Engh GA, Ammeen DJ • Instr Course Lect (1999)
Key Findings:
  • Classic reference defining the AORI bone-defect classification (Types 1, 2A, 2B, 3)
  • Sets out the reconstruction algorithm — augments, structural allograft, custom implants — that cones later slot into
Clinical implication: The classification system that still dictates when a cone is indicated; essential background for any revision-TKA viva.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 10098042)
Evidence

Management of bone loss: augments, cones, offset stems

Level V
Radnay CS, Scuderi GR • Clin Orthop Relat Res (2006)
Key Findings:
  • Practical algorithm for selecting augments, cones, stems and offset stems in revision TKA
  • Describes how to combine zone-1 (augments), zone-2 (cones) and zone-3 (stems) fixation
Clinical implication: A useful framework that anticipates the three-zone (Morgan-Jones) load-sharing concept underpinning modern cone-plus-stem constructs.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 16672876)
Editorially reviewed — transparent references and correction processPublished by OrthoVellum Medical Education TeamEditorial boardMethodologyReview policy
Educational disclosure

Educational content is reviewed for source visibility, editorial coherence, and correction readiness.

No individual clinician credential is claimed unless a named person is shown.

Verify before clinical use; this is not medical advice or a substitute for local guidance.

Procedure console
18 min
Read
0
Sections
intermediate
Level
Peer-reviewed · 2026-06-20
Procedure info
Level
intermediate
Read time
18 min
Updated
2026-06-20
SURGICAL APPROACHES USED
Medial Parapatellar Approach to Knee
Browse all procedures