ABSTRACT
Despite clinical success, it is unclear which one, posterior-substituting (PS) or cruciate-retaining (CR) insert, has superior functional outcomes or longevity. We compared the collected results from 2 institutional review board-approved, multicenter, prospective observational studies following CR (412) and PS inserts (328). Participants were evaluated preoperatively, at 6 weeks, at 3 months, and at 1 and 2 years regarding pain, motion, function (Knee Society Score, Krackow Activity Score, Short Form-36), and procedure variables such as anesthesia and preoperative/perioperative/postoperative complications. Implant longevity was recorded at the 2-year follow-up. Improvement was observed within each group; however, there was no difference between groups in terms of pain, motion, or function at any end point. Two-year survival rate was higher than 95%. A higher incidence of wound hematoma was observed in the PS group. Both inserts can be used expecting satisfactory outcomes and high survival rates at 2 years.
Subject(s)
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee , Knee Joint/surgery , Knee Prosthesis , Osteoarthritis, Knee/surgery , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prosthesis Design , Recovery of Function , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Total knee arthroplasty is a safe last-resort treatment for osteoarthritis that has excellent results in low-function-demand elderly patients. Current implants offer the same results in high-function-demand patients. However, supportive data do not exist.One-year Krackow Activity Scores (KAS) of 552 patients from 2 prospective studies were used to retrospectively determine low- and high-function-demand populations. Low function demand was defined as a KAS between 1 and 9 points, and high function demand was defined as a KAS between 10 and 18 points. Patients were assessed preoperatively and at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 1 and 2 years postoperatively per the Knee Society Score-function domain, KAS, SF-36, range of motion, and pain. Comparability between groups was tested for demographics and comorbidities.Both groups showed significant improvement in function, range of motion, and pain 2 years postoperatively. High-function-demand patients had comparable improvement in function compared with low-function-demand patients. Excellent function can be achieved in high-function-demand patients.
