LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Large Joints and Extremities/When the Going Gets Tough, the Tough Reach for a Fusion Nail
Large Joints and Extremities

When the Going Gets Tough, the Tough Reach for a Fusion Nail

March 3, 2026 3 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

When the Going Gets Tough, the Tough Reach for a Fusion Nail
Source: Pixabay and North Studio
StudiesTotal Knee ArthroplastyJournal of Arthroplastyperiprosthetic joint infectionknee painfusion nail

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after TKA: the complication that humbles even the most seasoned arthroplasty surgeon. When you add massive bone loss, shredded ligaments, a questionable extensor mechanism, and soft tissue that’s seen better decades, the reconstructive playbook starts looking thin.

Traditionally, this is where static spacers enter the chat — rigid, reliable…and not exactly beloved. High complication rates, limited mobility, and a general sense that everyone is just trying to survive the interval.

But what if your spacer could lift, deliver antibiotics like a precision strike, and refuse to mechanically fail?

Enter the fusion nail spacer (FNS) — the orthopedic equivalent of bringing a sledgehammer and a scalpel to the same fight.

The Study: 63 Knees, One Big Question

Across multiple centers, 63 patients treated between 2017 and 2023 were evaluated after receiving a modern modular knee fusion nail spacer for chronic PJI.

The goals were practical. Can you get them reimplanted? Can you eradicate infection? Can you save the limb? And does the construct actually hold up?

Reimplantation: A Win – But Not the Only Win

Advertisement

The researchers found that 60.3% of patients achieved successful TKA reimplantation, while 28.6% retained their fusion nail spacer (FNS) long-term and 9.5% required unplanned reoperations.

Here’s the key nuance: In this population — marked by severe bone loss, instability, and soft-tissue compromise — retaining a stable FNS isn’t necessarily a failure. In some cases, it’s a strategic victory. Not every knee needs to go back to a TKA if the limb is stable, painless, and infection-free.

Infection Control: Respectable in Rough Terrain

The percent of study patients who experienced a reinfection was 16%. Three cases occurred with the FNS in place and 7 occurred after reimplantation.

Given the host factors and local devastation typical of this cohort, those numbers land squarely in the “acceptable, especially for this battlefield” category.

The FNS construct provided mechanical stability, local antibiotic delivery and limb salvage potential.

That trifecta matters when options are dwindling.

Mechanical Performance: Built Like a Tank

Advertisement

Importantly, there were zero cases of mechanical implant failure. Radiographic loosening occurred in just 9.4% of the cases and periprosthetic fracture occurred in 4.8%.

For a construct bridging infected bone with compromised soft tissue, that’s impressive durability.

No broken nails. No catastrophic collapses. Just quiet, reliable stability.

If you’ve ever watched a traditional static spacer crumble under axial load, this is reassuring.

Functional Recovery: Not Just a Spacer, but a Setup for Motion

Among those reimplanted, mean extension was 3.6° and mean flexion was 87.6°.

In a population many would expect to be stiff and storm-battered, achieving functional motion approaching 90° of flexion is no small feat.

Reframing the Conversation With FNS

Advertisement

Survivorship analysis showed favorable implant durability when reinfection was used as the endpoint. Cox regression didn’t uncover dramatic predictors of failure, suggesting the construct performs consistently —even in a heterogeneous, high-risk population.

Chronic knee PJI with massive bone loss and instability represents one of arthroplasty’s most daunting challenges. Traditional static spacers often feel like damage control.

The modern modular FNS reframes the conversation:

  • It stabilizes.
  • It delivers antibiotics.
  • It preserves limb viability.
  • It avoids mechanical failure.
  • And sometimes…it becomes the final answer.

For patients with limited reconstructive alternatives, it’s a strategic bridge. Or in some cases, the destination.

Lessons for Clinic

If the issues you’re facing are severe bone loss, ligamentous insufficiency, extensor mechanism dysfunction or soft-tissue compromise, then a knee fusion nail spacer may offer favorable survivorship, acceptable reinfection rates, low mechanical complication rates, and real limb salvage potential.

In the high-stakes world of chronic PJI, that’s a construct worth having in your armamentarium.

Because sometimes the best move isn’t elegant reconstruction. It’s controlled, stable dominance.

Advertisement

And, based on this study, this nail seems ready for the fight.

Origin Study Title: Implant Survivorship and Functional Recovery Utilizing a Modern Knee Fusion Nail Spacer for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Authors: Brandon Naylor, D.O.; Alex Bradham, B.A.; Roshan Shah, M.D.; Joseph M. Schwab, M.D.; Mary Jane McConnell, B.S.; Alexander Dash, M.D.; Avtaar Daftari; Jon Minter, D.O.

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy