» Articles » PMID: 9645517

Complex Primary and Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Using the Condylar Constrained Prosthesis: an Average 5-year Follow-up

Overview
Journal J Arthroplasty
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 1998 Jun 30
PMID 9645517
Citations 27
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The condylar constrained total knee arthroplasty was performed on 29 patients undergoing 33 procedures and were reviewed clinically and radiographically at an average follow-up of 5 years (range, 2-10 years). There were 21 women and 8 men. The average age at the time of surgery was 70 years (range, 32-84). Of the 16 knees that were revision total knee arthroplasties, 8 had a previous infected total knee arthroplasty, and 17 knees had severe deformities requiring the use of the condylar constrained prosthesis. The patients were rated according to the Knee Society clinical and radiological evaluation protocol. Measurements of femoral and tibial component position were obtained as well as femoral tibial angle, patella position, and cement bone radiolucencies. All clinical measurements were made by an independent physical therapist. Clinical results revealed an improvement from an average preoperative knee score of 38 points to an average postoperative score of 86 points. The clinical results for 19 (58%) knees were excellent, 8 (24%) had a good result, 1 (3%) was fair, 2 (6%) were poor, and 3 (9%) were failures. The patients' average functional levels increased from 24 to 58. The final average flexion was 96 degrees. Three knees have been revised (9%). One was revised for recurrent infection, one for periprosthetic fracture, and one for mechanical loosening of the tibial component. There were no other knees with evidence of radiologic loosening. We conclude that the condylar constrained total knee prosthesis provides an acceptable solution for revision and complex primary total knee replacements at an intermediate follow-up term of 5 years.

Citing Articles

Semiconstrained posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty: indications, risks and benefits in primary and revision surgery.

Moisan P, Barimani B, Al Kindi M, Mutch J, Albers A Can J Surg. 2023; 66(2):E103-E108.

PMID: 36882202 PMC: 9998100. DOI: 10.1503/cjs.000622.


A Comparison Between Unstemmed and Stemmed Constrained Condylar Knee Prostheses in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

Zhao E, Zeng W, Ding Z, Liu Z, Luo Z, Zhou Z Orthop Surg. 2021; 14(2):246-253.

PMID: 34898021 PMC: 8867417. DOI: 10.1111/os.13093.


Traumatic Lateral Knee Dislocation of a Well-Functioning Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Case of Medial Collateral Ligament Rupture.

Smidt K, Dubose M, Shahrdar C Arthroplast Today. 2021; 11:168-172.

PMID: 34646922 PMC: 8495707. DOI: 10.1016/j.artd.2021.08.012.


Is varus-valgus constraint a reliable option in complex primary total knee arthroplasty? A systematic review.

Mancino F, Falez F, Mocini F, Sculco P, Maccauro G, Martino I J Orthop. 2021; 24:201-211.

PMID: 33746421 PMC: 7966964. DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2021.02.036.


Outcomes of Stemmed versus Un-Stemmed Varus-Valgus Constrained Components in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Morcos M, Howard J, Lanting B, MacDonald S, Naudie D, McCalden R Orthop Res Rev. 2021; 13:9-13.

PMID: 33442305 PMC: 7800685. DOI: 10.2147/ORR.S290015.