Three different cruciate-sacrificing TKA designs: minor intraoperative kinematic differences and negligible clinical differences

Purpose The goal of this study was to compare three types of mobile-bearing posterior cruciate ligament (PCL)-sacrificing TKA. The hypothesis was that the three designs provide differences in flexion stability and femoral rollback and improved clinical score at 2-year follow-up. Methods Three groups...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2014-12, Vol.22 (12), p.3113-3120
Main Authors: Bignozzi, Simone, Zaffagnini, Stefano, Akkawi, Ibrahim, Marko, Tedi, Bruni, Danilo, Neri, Maria Pia, Colle, Francesca, Marcacci, Maurilio
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods
Biomechanical Phenomena
Conformity
Design
Female
Femur - physiopathology
Humans
Hypotheses
Joint Instability - etiology
Joint Instability - prevention & control
Joint replacement surgery
Kinematics
Knee
Knee Prosthesis
Male
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Middle Aged
Navigation systems
Orthopedics
Osteoarthritis, Knee - physiopathology
Osteoarthritis, Knee - surgery
Patients
Physiology
Posterior Cruciate Ligament - surgery
Range of motion
Range of Motion, Articular
Retrospective Studies
Rotation
Tibia - physiopathology
Transplants & implants
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose The goal of this study was to compare three types of mobile-bearing posterior cruciate ligament (PCL)-sacrificing TKA. The hypothesis was that the three designs provide differences in flexion stability and femoral rollback and improved clinical score at 2-year follow-up. Methods Three groups of patients, divided according to implant design, were analysed retrospectively. All operations were guided by a non-image-based navigation system that recorded relative femoral and tibial positions in native and implanted knees during: passive range of motion and anterior drawer test at 90° flexion. WOMAC, KSS and SF36 scores were collected pre-operatively and at 2-year follow-up. Results There are no differences in kinematic or clinical performance of the three implants, except for the antero-posterior translation during stress test in flexion: only Cohort B had comparable pre- and post-operative laxity test values ( p  
ISSN:0942-2056
1433-7347
DOI:10.1007/s00167-014-3200-5