Ten-year Results Comparing Posterior Cruciate-retaining Versus Posterior Cruciate-substituting Total Knee Arthroplasty

Sando, Takashi; McCalden, Richard W.; Bourne, Robert B.; MacDonald, Steven J.; Somerville, Lyndsay

doi:10.1016/j.arth.2014.09.009

Cited by 35 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is relevant to look at the published results for other designs of TKA, which have reported survival rates of 97 to 100% for aseptic loosening at 10 years postimplantation. [11][12][13][14][15][16][17] This places the survival of this prosthesis design comparable with the previous design as well as other condylar designs at 10 years postimplantation. This provides reassurance for both surgeons and patients that this device, with a design change from its predecessor, performs as well as its predecessor and other devices of a similar class.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Ten-Year Results of the Press Fit Condylar Sigma Cobalt–Chrome Total Knee Replacement

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is reliant on safe and effective implants. The Press Fit Condylar Sigma Cobalt-Chrome (PFCSCC) was introduced in 2006, but no reports have examined long-term failure rates and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The primary aim of this study was to assess survival outcomes of the PFCSCC at 10 years after implantation. Prospective data collection was performed on all patients undergoing primary TKA in one orthopaedic department using this prosthesis exclusively from February 1, 2006, to January 31, 2007. Follow-up was at 10 years. Survival analysis was performed using two primary outcome measures: (1) all-cause joint revision and (2) aseptic revision. Secondary outcomes measures included the American Knee Society Score (AKSS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS). In total, 249 knees of 233 patients underwent primary TKA. Mean patient age was 66.7 years (range 34-80), and mean body mass index (BMI) was 30 kg/m (20.7-40.1). Reviewing all causes of revisions, 14 joints (5.6%) of 14 patients required reoperation. Of these, nine were for deep infection, including six in the first year. Four (1.6%) underwent aseptic revision. Mean AKSS changed from 47.6 to 90.4 ( = 140; < 0.001) at 10 years, and mean OKS changed from 38.3 to 23.2 ( = 149; < 0.001). Prospective analysis of consecutive TKA cases using this design of prosthesis demonstrated high survival rates of 94.4% (all-cause revision) and 98.4% (aseptic revision) at 10 years. Postoperative gains in PROMs were sustained at 10 years. These real-world data represent a substantial extension to previous reports for the PFCSCC and suggest that it is not prone to late mechanical failure.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Ten-Year Results of the Press Fit Condylar Sigma Cobalt–Chrome Total Knee Replacement

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Patients were assessed at follow-up for an average of 41.0 months, ranging from 6 6 to 147 months. 37 There were 2,591 (47.9%) TKAs completed using the CR method and 2,816 (52.1%) completed using PS method.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Complications were reported in only 17 of the 37 studies (45.9%). 3,[5][6][7]14,19,20,22,28,30,32,33,[35][36][37]44,45 There was an overall complication rate of 3.9% (213 complications in 5,407 knees). The meta-analysis 3,6,20,22,29,35,45 showed that no statistical difference was found between the two procedures (95% CI, 0.78-2.31; p ¼ 0.29).…”

Section: Range Of Motion and Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of Posterior-Stabilized Compared with Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this systematic review is to compare clinical outcome scores, rate of complications, and range of motion (ROM) of posterior-stabilized (PS) and cruciate-retaining (CR) total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) both pre- and postoperatively to establish which of the two kinds of implants have the best efficiency. A comprehensive search was performed of studies comparing CR and PS TKAs on PubMed, OVID/Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, Google scholar, and Embase databases. Finally, 37 studies were selected with a total of 5,407 knees in 4,445 patients. For the PS knees, the Knee Society Functional Score (KSFS) improved from 44.6 to 77.6 ( = 0.04), extension decreased from 6.6 to 1.8 degrees (-value), and flexion increased from 115.2 to 119.4 degrees ( < 0.00001), compared with the CR knees. No significant difference in the Knee Society objective score (KSOS) ( = 0.82) or complication rates ( = 0.29) was found. The overall complication rate was 3.9%, 213 in 5,407 knees. Surgeons must be careful in interpreting these results, as an improved ROM for the PS group may not correlate to better patient outcomes. This meta-analysis has demonstrated that PS TKA has a statistically significant greater postoperative improvement of KSFS ( = 0.04), flexion ( < 0.00001), and extension ( = 0.02), compared with the CR group. These findings seem to lead the surgeons to prefer the PS design for TKAs especially to achieve a higher postoperative ROM in patients with high functional demands. On the contrary, the CR and PS TKAs have similar results in terms of complications and most of clinical outcomes analyzed in the included studies. Therefore, the long-term follow-up of high-quality randomized controlled trials is needed to clarify which of the two types of prosthesis provide the better clinical outcome and the lower rate of complications for osteoarthritis patients in particular cohorts. This is a systematic review (level II).

show abstract

“…There were a large number of publications examining the clinical differences between CR and CS designs, but most of them had small size and a follow-up as short as 5 years and the findings on clinical outcomes were controversial [9][10][11][12]. As far as we know, only 3 studies have reported comparative clinical outcomes with a minimum follow-up of 10 years [13][14][15]. One of these [13] was a randomized study of 62 patients at 2 years and then reviewed at 10 years where the authors reported similar ROM and functional outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cruciate-Retaining vs Posterior-Stabilized Primary Total Arthroplasty. Clinical Outcome Comparison With a Minimum Follow-Up of 10 Years

Serna-Berna

Lizaur-Utrilla

Vizcaya-Moreno

et al. 2018

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Ten-year Results Comparing Posterior Cruciate-retaining Versus Posterior Cruciate-substituting Total Knee Arthroplasty

Cited by 35 publications

References 25 publications

Ten-Year Results of the Press Fit Condylar Sigma Cobalt–Chrome Total Knee Replacement

Ten-Year Results of the Press Fit Condylar Sigma Cobalt–Chrome Total Knee Replacement

Outcomes of Posterior-Stabilized Compared with Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty

Cruciate-Retaining vs Posterior-Stabilized Primary Total Arthroplasty. Clinical Outcome Comparison With a Minimum Follow-Up of 10 Years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About