Literature DB >> 11172267

Concave versus posterior-stabilized tibial joint surface in total knee arthroplasty: randomized evaluation of 47 knees.

J Uvehammer1, J Kärrholm, L Regnér, L Carlsson, P Herberts.   

Abstract

Forty-seven knees in 43 patients with severe deformities randomly received AMK total knee arthroplasty with concave (C, n = 25) or posterior-stabilized (PS, n = 22) polyethylene insert and with resection of the posterior cruciate ligament. Radiostereometric examinations were done postoperatively and after 3, 12, and 24 months. Two patients (1 C, 1 PS) underwent revision surgery. At the 2-year follow-up, the median absolute rotations of the tibial inserts ranged from 0.13 degrees to 0.26 degrees (C vs PS; P =.1-.7). The maximum total point motion was almost identical in the 2 groups (C, 0.38; PS, 0.39; P =.9). Maximum subsidence, lift-off, and Hospital for Special Surgery scores did not differ (P =.1-.6). Recipients of 20 of 24 knees with concave design and 14 of 19 knees with posterior-stabilized design reported that their knee could be regarded as normal or almost normal. Variations of the configuration of the polyethylene insert did not alter the outcome in the short term.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11172267     DOI: 10.1054/arth.2001.17939

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  6 in total

1.  Different intraoperative kinematics with comparable clinical outcomes of ultracongruent and posterior stabilized mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Tae Woo Kim; Sang Min Lee; Sang Cheol Seong; Sahnghoon Lee; Jak Jang; Myung Chul Lee
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Cruciate retaining and cruciate substituting ultra-congruent insert.

Authors:  Luca Mazzucchelli; Davide Deledda; Federica Rosso; Nicola Ratto; Matteo Bruzzone; Davide Edoardo Bonasia; Roberto Rossi
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-01

Review 3.  Comparison of Functional Outcomes, Femoral Rollback and Sagittal Stability of Anterior-Stabilized Versus Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Balgovind S Raja; Aditya K S Gowda; Sajid Ansari; Arghya Kundu Choudhury; Roop Bhushan Kalia
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2021-08-23       Impact factor: 1.033

4.  Posterior-stabilized inserts are preferable to cruciate-substituting ultracongruent inserts due to more favourable kinematics and stability.

Authors:  Ji-Hoon Bae; Jung-Ro Yoon; Ju-Hyoung Sung; Young-Soo Shin
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-02-19       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 5.  Adherence of hip and knee arthroplasty studies to RSA standardization guidelines. A systematic review.

Authors:  Rami Madanat; Tatu J Mäkinen; Hannu T Aro; Charles Bragdon; Henrik Malchau
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2014-06-23       Impact factor: 3.717

6.  Tibial baseplate position and posterior cruciate ligament status impact patient-reported outcomes in conforming dual-pivot bearing total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Joseph A Madden; Payton K Arnold; Leonard T Buller; Evan R Deckard; R Michael Meneghini
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2021-10-04
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.