» Articles » PMID: 19793397

Retention of the Posterior Cruciate Ligament Versus the Posterior Stabilized Design in Total Knee Arthroplasty: a Prospective Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialties Orthopedics
Physiology
Date 2009 Oct 2
PMID 19793397
Citations 13
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Prosthetic design for the use in primary total knee arthroplasty has evolved into designs that preserve the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) and those in which the ligament is routinely sacrificed (posterior stabilized). In patients with a functional PCL the decision which design is chosen depends largely on the favour and training of the surgeon.The objective of this study is to determine whether the patient's perceived outcome and speed of recovery differs between a posterior cruciate retaining total knee arthroplasty and a posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty.

Methods/design: A randomized controlled trial will be conducted. Patients who are admitted for primary unilateral TKA due to primary osteoarthrosis are included when the following inclusion criteria are met: non-fixed fixed varus or valgus deformity less than 10 degrees, age between 55 and 85 years, body mass index less than 35 kg/m(2) and ASA score (American Society of Anaesthesiologists) I or II. Patients are randomized in 2 groups. Patients in the posterior cruciate retaining group will receive a prosthesis with a posterior cut-out for the posterior cruciate ligament and relatively flat topography. In patients allocated to the posterior stabilized group, in which the posterior cruciate ligament is excised, the design may substitute for this function by an intercondylar tibial prominence that articulates with the femur in flexion. Measurements will take place preoperatively and 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year postoperatively.At all measurement points patient's perceived outcome will be assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Secondary outcome measures are quality of life (SF-36) and physician reported functional status and range of motion as determined with the Knee Society Clinical Rating System (KSS).

Discussion: In the current practice both posterior cruciate retaining and posterior stabilized designs for total knee arthroplasty are being used. To date no studies have been performed determining whether there is a difference in patient's perceived outcome between the two designs. Additionally, there is a lack of studies determining the speed of recovery in both designs as most studies only determine the final outcome. This randomised controlled study has been designed to determine whether the patient's perceived outcome and speed of recovery differs between a posterior cruciate retaining total knee arthroplasty and a posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty.

Trial Registration: The trial is registered in the Netherlands Trial Registry (NTR1673).

Citing Articles

Comparison of clinical outcomes among total knee arthroplasties using posterior-stabilized, cruciate-retaining, bi-cruciate substituting, bi-cruciate retaining designs: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Sun K, Wu Y, Wu L, Shen B Chin Med J (Engl). 2023; 136(15):1817-1831.

PMID: 37365688 PMC: 10406014. DOI: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000002183.


Higher mid-term revision rates of posterior stabilized compared with cruciate retaining total knee arthroplasties: 133,841 cemented arthroplasties for osteoarthritis in the Netherlands in 2007-2016.

Spekenbrink-Spooren A, Van Steenbergen L, Denissen G, Swierstra B, Poolman R, Nelissen R Acta Orthop. 2018; 89(6):640-645.

PMID: 30350747 PMC: 6300738. DOI: 10.1080/17453674.2018.1518570.


Cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty: How much of the PCL is really retained?.

Totlis T, Iosifidis M, Melas I, Apostolidis K, Agapidis A, Eftychiakos N Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016; 25(11):3556-3560.

PMID: 27141866 DOI: 10.1007/s00167-016-4144-8.


Quality-of-life assessment among patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty in Manaus.

Leao M, Santoro E, Avelino R, Coutinho L, Granjeiro R, Orlando Junior N Rev Bras Ortop. 2015; 49(2):194-201.

PMID: 26229799 PMC: 4511687. DOI: 10.1016/j.rboe.2014.03.017.


Preservation of the PCL when performing cruciate-retaining TKA: Is the tibial tuberosity a reliable predictor of the PCL footprint location?.

Jawhar A, Kadavkolan A, Wasnik S, Scharf H, Roehl H Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014; 24(1):58-63.

PMID: 25218577 DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-3309-6.


References
1.
Blunn G, Walker P, Joshi A, Hardinge K . The dominance of cyclic sliding in producing wear in total knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991; (273):253-60. View

2.
Andriacchi T, Galante J . Retention of the posterior cruciate in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1988; 3 Suppl:S13-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(88)80003-2. View

3.
Worland R, Johnson G, Alemparte J, Jessup D, Keenan J, Norambuena N . Ten to fourteen year survival and functional analysis of the AGC total knee replacement system. Knee. 2002; 9(2):133-7. DOI: 10.1016/s0968-0160(01)00146-6. View

4.
Insall J, Dorr L, Scott R, Scott W . Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989; (248):13-4. View

5.
Lew W, Lewis J . The effect of knee-prosthesis geometry on cruciate ligament mechanics during flexion. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982; 64(5):734-9. View