Case report: proximal tibiofibular joint instability-a forgotten cause in revision total knee arthroplasty?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Proximal tibiofibular joint instability (PTJI) is a rare condition, particularly in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revision, with only one prior case reported. This case highlights the importance of considering PTJI in patients with chronic lateral knee pain and instability following TKA and demonstrates a novel stabilization approach for managing this challenging condition. Case Description: A 73-year-old female with a history of multiple knee surgeries presented to our clinic due to increasing lateral knee pain radiating along the syndesmosis, aggravated by activities like squatting. Clinical examination revealed anteroposterior subluxation of the fibular head, suggesting PTJI. Radiological findings confirmed tibial component loosening, and the diagnosis of aseptic loosening with PTJI was made. Given her complex surgical history, a two-stage revision was planned. The first stage involved prosthesis removal, bacteriological sampling, and spacer placement. The second stage included revision TKA and proximal tibiofibular joint (PTFJ) stabilization using a Twin Tail Tight-Rope™ system and Arthrex endobutton, preserving joint mobility and restoring functional stability. A hinged revision knee prosthesis was then implanted. The patient had an uneventful recovery. At 1-year follow-up, the pain score was 1/10 and she achieved good mobility. Radiographs showed satisfactory implant positioning. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score of 15/96 indicated a successful outcome. Conclusions: PTJI is rare and is not typically associated with TKA. This case report highlights a unique presentation of PTJI in a multi-revised TKA, raising concerns about the potential role of repeated proximal tibial resections in ligamentous instability of the PTFJ. The specific localization of pain and its resolution following PTFJ fixation support this hypothesis. Therefore, careful assessment of the PTFJ should be considered in TKA revisions, particularly in cases involving extensive lateral tibial resections.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".