In the left column the Table
lists in successive frequency order the joint diseases that destructed
joints and might give reason for some operative treatment: the list comes
from the first edition of the “Campbell’s Operative Orthopaedics” that appeared in 1936. The first three places are
occupied by joint infections. Osteoarthritis of the joints, the joint
disease that prevails in our modern society comes not until fifth.
In the right column are
diagnoses for total hip replacement operations. The data are adapted from
the Swedish National Hip Register for 2000. We see that two first places in
this statistics are occupied by osteoarthritis of the hip joints; on the
third place comes rheumatoid arthritis. On the other hand, the list does not
contain any total hip replacement done for hip joint infection or its
remainder.
Paralleling the disappearance
of bacterial joint infections there has been a remarkable increase of aged
people among the general population in the developed countries.
Why and how the joint
infections disappeared in our modern society is not entirely clear. We know
only that the development and use of modern antibiotics to treat bacterial
infections has not been the only cause of change.
The important fact is that the
change from devastating bacterial joint infectons
to the more amenable osteoarthrititis as a
prevailing joint ailment that occurred after 1950’s was also a necessary
prerequisite for the success of modern total joint replacement procedures.
Without this change in the joint disease panorama, the total joint surgery
would remain a rather small subspecialty of orthopaedic
surgery.
2
From amputation of limbs to resection of joints – steps on the way to total
joints
The surgical treatment of
potentially lethal bacterial joint infections of the period before the
therapeutic revolution carried with it important ethical problems. We should
remember that in the 19th century, an innocently looking open
fracture of the lower leg or a wound through to the joint carried with it a
30% risk of death for the patient.
Similarly, the bacterial joint
infections caused in 30% to 80% of all cases sepsis (spread of bacteria
through blood into vital organs, such as brain, lung, kidneys) with lethal
outcome.
When the infection of a joint
developed the surgeons had only one operation method that might save the
patient’s life – to amputate the whole extremity together with the infected
joint and hope that the patient would survive the surgery. This dilemma
applied to chronic infections caused by tuberculosis and syphilitic
infections too. Also these joint infections ended often with the patient’s
dead. There were no drugs to stop the infection from spreading into the
rest of the body. Moreover, there were no methods to mitigate the chock
caused by the amputation itself, a quick but brutal surgery as it was
necessary in the era without anesthesia, so that even the amputation
operation was followed by high death rates.
Picture: From amputation to joint
resection to total joint replacement (shoulder joint)
 |
Uppermost picture: Infected
shoulder joint (Schematically, infection = red circle in the picture)
Amputation of the whole upper
extremity – the whole upper extremity is removed = amputated or
exarticulated through the shoulder joint. The
infection focus is removed; the whole upper extremity is sacrificed.
Resection = only the upper part
of the arm-bone = humerus is removed. The
infection focus is removed, but the patient retains the upper extremity; it
is hoped that the patient will develop useful function in the rests of the
shoulder joint. Insert shows the 19th century illustration of
shoulder joint resection; the illustration is probably not unrealistic; in
the era before narcosis was known the operation might look as in this
picture.
Artificial joints = the space
left after removed parts of the shoulder joint is replaced by an artificial
joint. The patient retains both the whole upper extremity and the function
in the shoulder joint. |
| From amputation to joint
resection to total joint replacement (shoulder joint)
Click on the icons for a full size pictures |
In the 19th century
there appeared a radical surgical innovation – joint resection. Joint
resection is an operation that removes a part or a whole of a joint instead
of removing the whole extremity. Joint resection was considered by some
surgeons as the most genial surgical idea of the 19th century.
The operation was developed from the desire to save the patient’s life and
his limb too; in modern term we would say that it stemmed from “the desire
to improve the quality of patient’s life”.
Of course, our ancestors did
not use such modern terms, although they were rather poetic too when
demonstrating the advantages of the joint resection operation.
The renowned German surgeon
Bernhard von Langenbeck said in 1873: “the
surgeon is no longer proud when he sees the rows of amputation stumps he had
left behind himself, he sees them rather with sorrow as the witnesses
documenting the imperfection of his art”.
To demonstrate the advantages
of the joint resection operation professor von Langenbeck presented one of his patients, Lieutenant von Petersburg.
This brave soldier of the Prussian army received a shot in his right
shoulder joint that splintered the upper part of the right arm- bone (humerus)
during the Prussian-Austrian war in 1866. The usual surgical practice in
such cases was to amputate the whole right arm to prevent spreading of
infection. Professor von Langenbeck removed,
however, only the splintered upper part of the right arm-bone – and it
healed. The brave soldier retained his right arm in spite of the severe
injury.
Picture:
Lieutenant with right shoulder resected
 |
The picture shows the brave
Lieutenant keeping his sword in his right hand again. Note how the contours
of his right shoulder are distorted, the contours of the muscles that move
the shoulder joint are lacking. An insert shows the damaged upper part of
the arm-bone that professor von Langenbeck
removed = resected to save the upper extremity.
I am not certain how much
function was left in the shoulder of the brave soldier, probably very little
because the muscles that move the shoulder were lacking. But the message of
this picture is obvious: This brave Lieutenant will be able to continue his
military duties thanks to the new operation – the joint resection.
|
|
Lieutenant von Petersburg who
had the right shoulder joint resected. (from Blauth 1979) |
Not all surgeons subscribed to
the new operation method of joint resection in cases of severe joint trauma.
The renowned Scottish surgeon James Symes argued
that the first and foremost goal of all joint surgery is to save the
patient’s life. If the amputation saves nine patient lives out of ten and
joint resection only eight, then, argued Syme,
the amputation is the method of choice, notwithstanding the quality of
patient’s life afterwards.
Compare these decisions of the
past on the life and death after joint surgery with today’s discussions on
the limits to playing golf after total joint surgery! Obviously, there has
been a progress.
3 Joints of ivory
and platinum – from Gluck to
Péan.
Themistocles
Gluck – joints of ivory
It soon became obvious that
simple joint resection did not improve the patient’s life too much. The
resected joint, or rather what remained of it
after the resection, was painful, unstable, in need of sturdy braces.
There were surgeons in the past
who had the insight that the free space left after removal = resection of
the diseased joint might be filled with an artificial joint, such as the
Russian surgeon N. I. Pirogow, who proposed the
replacement of a tuberculous knee with an
artificial joint made of ivory in 1830.
The first surgeon, however, who
replaced not one, but many tuberculous joints by
artificial joints made from ivory was the German
surgeon Themistocles Gluck.
 |
Picture: Professor
Themistocles Gluck (1853 -1942).
This very active surgeon had
an extraordinary misfortune. He carried not only suture of vessels, but also
venous grafts already in the 1880’s, long before the American surgeon
Carrel; yet the Nobel price for discovery of arterial suture went in 1912 to
just Alexis Carrel.
As the pupil of professor von
Langenbeck, working with him at the Berlin’s
Surgical Clinic, T. Gluck exerted himself to the
utmost to change the contemporary surgery “from being the destructive art to
become the reconstructive art”. In this activity he developed artificial
total joints, fabricated from ivory. And he implanted them in patients. |
His lecture in 1890 on his
total joint experiments was presented at the 10th International
Medical Congress in Berlin. When it appeared in
the printed form the Literature
references section contained 117 citations of published papers, 53 of them
were Gluck’s own publications.
 |
The German
orthopaedic surgeon professor
Wessinghage could in 1991 trace totally 14 total
joint replacements carried out by Gluck during the
1880's and described in Gluck's publications; five of them were still in
function 1891: three total knee replacements, one elbow, and one wrist total
replacement. All total joints were made from ivory. For their fixation
inside the marrow cavity Gluck often used a special form of very hot
"bone cement" that hardened within one minute.
All replacements were done on
joints destructed by tuberculous infection. The
infection was active, there was no known treatment for the infection, and
yet Gluck ventured to carry out resection of the
destructed joint and then replace it with an artificial joint made from
ivory.
|
| Total knee joint
- a modular hinge made from ivory |
Initially, the state of the
patients improved much after replacement surgery because the massive
infectious focus was removed. Also the function in the replaced joints
returned, and Gluck demonstrated gladly these
patients on different surgical meetings. Unfortunately, because there was no
available treating for the tuberculosis infection, the infection returned
eventually and necessitated removal of the ivory total joint constructions.
Yet, you name any modern
development of artificial joints and Gluck
already thought of it or realized it. Here are some of them:
Stabile fixation of the
artificial joint: Gluck used either contemporary
“bone cement” or used cementless fixation for
his total joints. Above all, Gluck proclaimed
that the total joint must be fixated “iron-steady” to the patient’s skeleton
if it should succeed.
Modular construction of
artificial joints: Gluck proposed that total
joints should be assambled by the surgeon
directly at the operation board from modular parts of different sizes.
Stress shielding principle –
Gluck declared that the skeleton behaves
according to the principle to use the minimum of bone mass just able to bear
the load put on it. Therefore, he thought that ivory was the best material
for total joints; it is equally light and equally strong as the bone tissue
itself. Modern surgeons call this principle “Wolff’s law”.
Gluck
proposed that joints taken from corpses and amputated limbs may be used as
replacement parts although he himself did not use them. Modern total joint
surgery uses the so called allografts (joints
and bones from corpses) at revision operations in increasing numbers.
Gluck
demonstrated in animal experiments that marrow hole will accept the shaft of
the artificial joint if it is stably anchored within it. This is one of the
keystones of the modern total joint surgery.
Gluck
was the first to develop the idea of biocompatibility – the foreign
materials for total joints must be well tolerated by the patient’s body.
His total joint
replacement operations were a splendid idea done on wrong patients
and at the wrong time. Even in modern times, with the availability
of antibiotics to treat the joint tuberculosis, the total joint
replacement of joints damaged by previous tuberculosis infection is
very difficult. Recent report (Mars 2005) summarized experience with
32 total knee operations done on knees with healed out tuberculosis
or other infections. The authors point out that it is a difficult
operation with high risk of complications (12.5% in
the authors' case) and rather uncertain
return of function in the replaced knee
joint (Bae 2005).
To
Gluck’s defense I must say that
he believed that treatment of tuberculosis with Koch’s medicine “Lymphe”
would heal the tuberculosis, as did many of his contemporaries, even
the new director of the Berlin’s surgical clinic professor von
Bergman. The Lymphe was, however, worse
than worthless; it increased susceptibility of patients to the
tuberculous infection.
After
Gluck’s lecture in 1890 there came a
severe clash with his chief professor von Bergman, new Head of the
Berlin surgical clinic. Behind it was von Bergman's disappointment with
the failure of treatment of his own patients with Koch's Lymphe and
his disillusionment with all things that may mean progress of surgery.
Professor von Bergman
forced Gluck to publish a repentant
declaration, in which Gluck retracted
his results with total joint replacement, his recommendations for
the method, his
ideas for further development of total joint replacement. He wrote
in his open retracting letter that replacement of joints with active
tuberculosis was erroneous because the infection recurred. He took
all responsibility for this mistake on himself. He then sank into
oblivion.
When I read
Gluck’s honest, open letter today I always think of
another letter, John Charnley's retraction of the
results of Teflon total hips. What a difference!
(Charnley
1963)
Where Gluck failed was in the choice of materials and in the choice of
patients. But these failures were due to the era in which he lived and
worked. The modern materials such as Stainless steel, Cobalt chrome and
Titanium alloys lay in the distant future. There was, however, one surgeon
contemporary with Gluck who recognized the
importance of biologically inert metals for manufacture of total joints. And
this surgeon was led by Gluck’s ideas.
Jules Emile
Péan (1830- 1898) - joints from rubber and
platinum
was
one of the leading French surgeons. Among his credits was the invention of
the hemostat, an instrument (squeezer) used to compress bleeding vessels. In
a paper published in 1894, he defended Gluck’s
ideas on total joint replacement.
He wrote “We wish particularly
to stress today the value of prosthetic apparatus, extolled by
Gluck for the past few years, its worth wrongly
denied by most surgeons...”
Péan
then continued to describe his own patient “almost dying with tuberculosis
of the humerus including the shoulder joint… and
of difficulties so severe that we bluntly thought there was nothing else to
do but disarticulation” (amputation of the whole
extremity in the shoulder joint).
But Péan
was persuaded by the patient to do resection of the diseased
humerus (arm-bone) and replace the removed parts
with an artificial joint. “We therefore decided to use a device constructed
according to the design of Gluck; we first
consulted M. Mathieu, our skillful mechanic … he was able to give us one of
Gluck’s pieces. This device was too weak, made
of ivory, a substance too easily resorbable,
with an articulation too little movable. Péan
then asked the dentist, Dr Michaels, to work with him to “design a
prosthetic device made of an unalterable material and capable of lending
itself to an artificial joint with all its motions”.
Picture: Artificial shoulder
joint made of rubber and platinum
 |
Dr
Michaels constructed an artificial shoulder joint from hardened
rubber and iridescent platinum “with a speed and facility worthy of
commendation”. The included illustration demonstrated the first total
shoulder joint: the head of the humerus was
replaced by a round piece of hardened rubber attached to the stem of platinum; the blurred illustration
does not reveal how the stem itself was attached to the shaft of the
humerus. The rubber head was
attached by a platinum wire to the rests of the shoulder joint
socket. |
| Artificial shoulder
joint made of rubber and platinum |
The operation with resection of
the destructed upper part of the humerus and
replacement with the artificial joint succeeded well, “ since the
operation the patient had gained 35 pounds and his health would have been
excellent had he not be troubled by recurrence of small abscesses...we had
to open this small abscess on 4 different occasions.” The paper does not
tell anything about the function in the replaced shoulder joint.
Péan
concluded his article with six statements that presaged the era of total
joint replacement. The first two stated that
“It is possible to replace an
important part of the skeleton and even a joint”
“That this device to be well
tolerated should be not only aseptic, but made of non-resorbable
material.”
Péan's
collaboration with a dental surgeon, doctor Michael, in producing the
total joint is the first of many future examples demonstrating that
surgery of total joint replacement owes much of its progress to
collaboration with dental surgeons.
It took then more than seventy
years until Gluck’s
and Péan’s ideas materialized. When the right
kind of patients with right joint disease (osteoarthritis) were increasing
among the general population since 1960’s and demanded efficient treatment
and when the total joint devices made from right materials became available,
total joint replacement operations spread as a big epidemic through all
developed countries.
_____________________________________
References:
Bae
DK et al.: Total knee arthroplasty in
stiff knees after previous infection. J Bone Joint
Surg Br. 2005 Mar;87(3):333-6.
Blauth
W,
Donner
K.:
Zur
Geschichte
der
Arthroplastik.
Z
Orthop
1979;
117:
997-106
Charnley
J.:
Letter
to
Editor.
Tissue
reactions
to
polytetrafluorethylene.
The
Lancet.
Dec
28;1963:1379
T. Gluck:
Referat uber die durch
das moderne chirurgische Experiemnt
gevonnenen positiven
Resultate, betreffend
die Naht und den Ersatz
von Defecten höherer
Gewebe…Langenbecks
Arch klin
Chir 1891, 41: 187-239
B. von Langenbeck:
Uber die Endresultate
der Gelenkresektionen im
Kriege.
Langenbecks Arch
klin Chir 1874; 16:
340- 490
J E
Péan:
Des moyens prosthetiques
destines a obtenir la reparation de parties
osseuses. Gaz de
Hôp Paris 1894: 67: 291-302.
Reprinted
in
Clin
Orthop
Relat
Res
1973;
94:
4
-7