Literature DB >> 19835308

Effect of posterior condylar offset on cruciate-retaining mobile TKA.

Seung-Suk Seo1, Dong-Jun Ha, Chang-Wan Kim, Jang-Seok Choi.   

Abstract

The objective of this article was to evaluate the effect of the change of posterior condylar offset to range of motion (ROM) and clinical results after computer-assisted cruciate-retaining mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). A total of 111 knees underwent cruciate-retaining mobile-bearing TKAs under computer-assisted navigation from January 2005 to September 2007. All cases were primary osteoarthritis and had <15 degrees of valgus or varus deformity. We divided patients into 4 groups according to change of posterior condylar offset, which was measured by postoperative minus preoperative posterior condylar offset (group 1: <-2 mm; group 2: -2-0 mm; group 3: 0-+2 mm; group 4: >2 mm). Preoperative age, thigh girth, body mass index, flexion contracture, further flexion, Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, Knee Society (KS) knee score, and KS functional score did not show significant difference between groups. The measured change of posterior condylar offset ranged from +3.70 to -3.95 mm with a mean value of -1.67 mm. Postoperatively, there were no statistical differences between each group on flexion contracture (P=.522), further flexion (P=.442), HSS score (P=.116), KS knee score (P=.479), or KS functional score (P=.578). We could find no significant difference between ROM or clinical results with computer-assisted cruciate-retaining mobile-bearing TKAs in the comparison of groups according to changes of posterior condylar offset. Copyright 2009, SLACK Incorporated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19835308     DOI: 10.3928/01477447-20090915-59

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopedics        ISSN: 0147-7447            Impact factor:   1.390


  8 in total

1.  The effect of posterior tibial slope on knee flexion in posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Xiaojun Shi; Bin Shen; Pengde Kang; Jing Yang; Zongke Zhou; Fuxing Pei
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-06-02       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Radiographic measurement of the posterior femoral offset is not precise.

Authors:  Jean-Yves Jenny; Sophie Honecker; Yves Chammai
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Plain radiographs underestimate the asymmetry of the posterior condylar offset of the knee compared with MRI.

Authors:  Pramod B Voleti; Jason W Stephenson; Paul A Lotke; Gwo-Chin Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  A dutch survey on circumpatellar electrocautery in total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Hans-Peter W van Jonbergen; Alexander F W Barnaart; Cees C P M Verheyen
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2010-06-22

5.  No sex differences exist in posterior condylar offsets of the knee.

Authors:  Pramod B Voleti; Jason W Stephenson; Paul A Lotke; Gwo-Chin Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Effect of femoral posterior condyle offset on knee joint function after total knee replacement: a network meta-analysis and a sequential retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Yimin Zhang; Jun Wang; Miao Zhang; Yun Xu
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 2.359

7.  Clinical outcomes after using patient specific instrumentation: is it worth the effort? A minimum 5-year retrospective review of 298 PSI knees.

Authors:  Luke Nugent; Sarang Kasture; Muthu Ganapathi
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-10-10       Impact factor: 2.928

8.  Changes in Femoral Posterior Condylar Offset, Tibial Posterior Slope Angle, and Joint Line Height after Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Sang Jun Song; Dae Kyung Bae; Kang Il Kim; Ho Yeon Jeong
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2016-02-29
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.