Author:
Limmahakhun Sakkadech,Chaiamporn Anuchit,Klunklin Kasisin,Jingjit Warakorn
Abstract
Abstract
Background
The rationale for gradually reducing radius (GR) femoral component aims to prevent flexion instability by gradually change the center of femoral rotation, unlike a discrete change by the multi-radius (MR) which is more common for most of total knee arthroplasties (TKA). However, no strong evidence has been reported the clinical significance of the GR design.
Methods
This patient-blinded, parallel, non-inferiority trial conducted in September 2020. Patients with knee osteoarthritis consented for cruciate retaining TKA were randomly allocated to a GR or MR group. Primary outcome measures were knee functions at postoperative 6 and 12 months using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Secondary outcome measures were performance-based tests (30-s chair stand test, 40-m fast paced walk test, and 3-m timed up and go test), and knee motions.
Results
Sixty patients were enrolled and randomized; GR (n = 30) and MR (n = 30) group. The changes of KOOS at 6 and 12 months from baseline showed clinical meaningful for both GR and MR group. At 6 and 12 months postoperatively, there was no significant difference between both groups in all KOOS subscales. The length of stay was not different between GR and MR group (5.93 ± 1.44 vs 6.17 ± 1.86 days, p = 0.59). Patients on both groups presented similar performance-based tests. However, the improvement in degrees of knee motion for the GR group was significantly greater than the MR group (34.67 ± 12.52 vs 23.67 ± 12.59, p = 0.001).
Conclusion
GR was noninferiority to MR for the functional outcomes and performances after TKA.
The GR femoral component gave more knee motions than did the MR prostheses.
Level of evidence
Level I, therapeutic study.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Orthopedics and Sports Medicine,Rheumatology
Reference21 articles.
1. Baker PN, van der Meulen JH, Lewsey J, Gregg PJ. The role of pain and function in determining patient satisfaction after total knee replacement. Data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales The J of bone and joint surgBritish. 2007;89(7):893–900.
2. Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KD. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(1):57–63.
3. White PB, Turcan S, Satalich JR, Ranawat AS, Ranawat CS. Clinical Outcomes of a Modern Total Knee Arthroplasty Prosthesis Compared to Its Predecessor at 5-Year Follow-Up: Matched Pair Analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2020;35(11):3150–5.
4. Frankel VH, Burstein AH, Brooks DB. Biomechanics of internal derangement of the knee. Pathomechanics as determined by analysis of the instant centers of motion The Journal of bone and joint surgery American. 1971;53(5):945–62.
5. Kennedy JC, Fowler PJ. Medial and anterior instability of the knee. An anatomical and clinical study using stress machines The Journal of bone and joint surgery American. 1971;53(7):1257–70.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献