» Articles » PMID: 23054522

No Better Flexion or Function of High-flexion Designs in Asian Patients with TKA

Overview
Publisher Wolters Kluwer
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2012 Oct 12
PMID 23054522
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Recently, high-flexion PCL-retaining (CR) and -substituting (PS) knee prostheses were designed to allow greater and safer flexion after TKA. However, the advantages of high-flexion TKA over standard design have been debated in terms of early maximal flexion. A recent study reported a high incidence of early loosening of the femoral component related to the deep flexion provided by high-flexion PS TKA.

Questions/purposes: We determined whether high-flexion fixed bearing CR and PS prostheses would provide (1) a better flexion, (2) a better function, and (3) a higher incidence of radiographic loosening than TKA performed using standard fixed bearing CR prostheses in Asian patients.

Methods: From a total of 182 patients with primary unilateral TKA, we retrospectively reviewed 137 TKAs: 47 with high-flexion CR, 42 with high-flexion PS, and 48 with standard CR designs. ROM, Knee Society scores, and WOMAC scores were evaluated and compared among the three groups. Radiographically, we assessed radiolucent zones and component loosening. Minimum followup was 5 years (mean, 6.2 years; range, 5-8 years).

Results: We found no differences among the three groups in mean maximal flexion (high-flexion CR: 135°; high-flexion PS: 134°; standard CR: 136°), Knee Society scores, and WOMAC scores at last followup. Also, there were no differences among the three groups in terms of radiolucent lines around the prosthesis. No patient in any group had loosening of the femoral component.

Conclusions: The high-flexion CR or PS design had no advantages over the standard CR design with respect to ROM, clinical scores, and radiolucent lines around the femoral or tibial component after 5 years' followup.

Citing Articles

Ten-year results for a single-surgeon series of Scorpio non-restrictive geometry (NRG) posterior stabilised (PS) total knee replacement.

Bajada S, Searle D, Toms A Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2019; 29(7):1533-1538.

PMID: 31152252 DOI: 10.1007/s00590-019-02456-w.


Is Achieving High Flexion Necessary for Satisfaction after Total Knee Arthroplasty in Indian Patients?.

Mavalankar A, Rani S Indian J Orthop. 2019; 53(2):270-275.

PMID: 30967696 PMC: 6415565. DOI: 10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_268_17.


Active Flexion in Weight Bearing Better Correlates with Functional Outcomes of Total Knee Arthroplasty than Passive Flexion.

Song Y, Jain N, Kang Y, Kim T, Kim T Knee Surg Relat Res. 2016; 28(2):118-29.

PMID: 27274468 PMC: 4895083. DOI: 10.5792/ksrr.2016.28.2.118.


Retrospective comparative study shows no significant difference in postural stability between cruciate-retaining (CR) and cruciate-substituting (PS) total knee implant systems.

Gotz J, Beckmann J, Sperrer I, Baier C, Dullien S, Grifka J Int Orthop. 2015; 40(7):1441-6.

PMID: 26686495 DOI: 10.1007/s00264-015-3067-1.

References
1.
Most E, Sultan P, Park S, Papannagari R, Li G . Tibiofemoral contact behavior is improved in high-flexion cruciate retaining TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006; 452:59-64. DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000238843.11176.42. View

2.
Banks S, Bellemans J, Nozaki H, Whiteside L, Harman M, Hodge W . Knee motions during maximum flexion in fixed and mobile-bearing arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003; (410):131-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000063121.39522.19. View

3.
Kim Y, Sohn K, Kim J . Range of motion of standard and high-flexion posterior stabilized total knee prostheses. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87(7):1470-5. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02707. View

4.
Huang H, Su J, Wang G . The early results of high-flex total knee arthroplasty: a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 2005; 20(5):674-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2004.09.053. View

5.
von Elm E, Altman D, Egger M, Pocock S, Gotzsche P, Vandenbroucke J . The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007; 370(9596):1453-7. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X. View