Literature DB >> 25445852

Ten-year results comparing posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior cruciate-substituting total knee arthroplasty.

Takashi Sando1, Richard W McCalden1, Robert B Bourne1, Steven J MacDonald1, Lyndsay E Somerville1.   

Abstract

We compared the 10-year survival rates and clinical outcomes of posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) versus posterior cruciate-substituting (CS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA), using the Genesis II knee system (Smith and Nephew, Memphis, TN). Our institutional database identified patients undergoing a primary knee with the Genesis II system between 1995 and 2000. These patients were followed for an average of 12.3years (range 10.2-14.4years). There were 143 (34.5%) CR and 271 (65.5%) CS implants. No significant difference in 10-year survivorship was noted between the two cohorts. The postoperative clinical scores (KSCRS, WOMAC, SF-12) and knee ROM were significantly better for the CS cohort. In this large, long-term, single-implant prospective study, CS performed better than CR in terms of clinical scores and range of motion.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical outcomes; posterior cruciate retaining; posterior cruciate substituting; survival; total knee arthroplasty

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25445852     DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.09.009

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


  9 in total

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

Authors:  Juergen Götz; Johannes Beckmann; Ingo Sperrer; Clemens Baier; Silvia Dullien; Joachim Grifka; Franz Koeck
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-12-19       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 2.  Controversial Topics in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A 5-Year Update (Part 1).

Authors:  Johannes Michiel van der Merwe; Matthew Semrau Mastel
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev       Date:  2020-01-03

Review 3.  Controversial Topics in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A 5-Year Update (Part 1).

Authors:  Johannes Michiel van der Merwe; Matthew Semrau Mastel
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev       Date:  2020-01-03

Review 4.  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

5.  Cruciate Retaining compared with Posterior Stabilised Nexgen total knee arthroplasty: results at 10 years in a matched cohort.

Authors:  Aiw Mayne; H P Harshavardhan; L R Johnston; W Wang; A Jariwala
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 1.891

6.  Comparison of long-term clinical outcomes after bilateral mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasties using PCL-retaining and PCL-substituting implants in the same patients.

Authors:  Yoshinori Ishii; Hideo Noguchi; Junko Sato; Tetsuya Sakurai; Shin-Ichi Toyabe
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-04-30       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis with severe varus deformity.

Authors:  Ethem Ayhan Ünkar; Yusuf Öztürkmen; Erhan Şükür; Engin Çarkçı; Murat Mert
Journal:  Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc       Date:  2017-01-17       Impact factor: 1.511

8.  No difference of survival between cruciate retaining and substitution designs in high flexion total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Gun-Woo Kim; Quan He Jin; Jun-Hyuk Lim; Eun-Kyoo Song; Jong-Keun Seon
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Autologous bone marrow mesenchymal cell induced chondrogenesis for the treatment of osteoarthritis of knee.

Authors:  Sung Woo Huh; Asode Ananthram Shetty; Jang Mook Kim; Mi-La Cho; Seon Ae Kim; Siyoung Yang; Young Ju Kim; Palaksha Kanive Javaregowda; Nam Yong Choi; Jin Kang; Seok Jung Kim
Journal:  Tissue Eng Regen Med       Date:  2016-04-05       Impact factor: 4.169

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.