| Literature DB >> 30173500 |
Sang Jun Song1, Se Gu Kang1, Cheol Hee Park2, Dae Kyung Bae3.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to compare clinical results after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using the Attune and PFC Sigma knee designs and to investigate whether the use of the Attune prosthesis increased the risk of patellar injury in Asian patients.Entities:
Keywords: Arthroplasty; Injury; Knee; Patella; Risk
Year: 2018 PMID: 30173500 PMCID: PMC6254870 DOI: 10.5792/ksrr.18.020
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Knee Surg Relat Res ISSN: 2234-0726
Fig. 1Modified design features of Attune compared to PFC Sigma. (A) The trochlear groove of Attune is extended more distally than PFC Sigma, resulting in a reduced intercondylar box ratio. (B) Reduced width and thickness of Attune (inner dimension; solid line) compared to PFC Sigma (outer dimension; dotted line). (C) The Attune prosthesis has a medialized dome patellar component for optimizing patellofemoral conformity.
Comparison of Patient Demographics between Groups
| Variable | Group A | Group B | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operating period | Nov 2014–Jun 2015 | Jan 2013–Nov 2014 | |
| No. of knees (patients) | 300 (273) | 300 (282) | |
| Age (yr) | 69.7±7.7 | 68.9±6.9 | 0.102 |
| Sex (female/male) | 287/13 | 290/10 | 0.524 |
| Right/left | 151/149 | 154/146 | 0.806 |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | 26.5±3.6 | 26.1±3.3 | 0.565 |
| OA/RA/Others | 289/5/6 | 290/6/4 | 0.455 |
| Range of motion (°) | 119.8±25.7 | 120.2±20.7 | 0.834 |
| Preoperative mechanical axis (°) | Varus 11.6±6.6 | Varus 11.7±7.5 | 0.751 |
| Follow-up period (mo) | 24.8±6.0 (16–37) | 33.3±9.0 (21–76) | <0.001 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation (range).
OA: osteoarthritis, RA: rheumatoid arthritis, Others: post-traumatic arthritis, infection sequelae, and hemophilic arthritis.
Group A patients who received the Attune prosthesis.
Group B patients who received the PFC Sigma prosthesis.
Fig. 2Component positions according to the Knee Society radiological evaluation method.
Fig. 3Radiographic measurement of the thickness of the original and residual patella. (A) Original patella. (B) Attune. (C) PFC Sigma. O: original patellar thickness, R: residual patellar thickness.
Comparison of the Clinical Results between the Groups
| Variable | Group A | Group B | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knee score | |||
| Preoperative | 42.2±16.9 | 43.9±9.0 | 0.145 |
| Postoperative | 93.1±6.4 | 88.8±6.2 | <0.001 |
| Change | 50.9±18.4 | 44.9±10.6 | <0.001 |
| Function score | |||
| Preoperative | 43.6±13.5 | 40.2±13.6 | 0.002 |
| Postoperative | 80.9±12.4 | 78.7±10.9 | 0.427 |
| Change | 37.3±15.4 | 38.5±15.3 | 0.201 |
| Range of motion (°) | |||
| Preoperative | 119.8±25.7 | 120.2±20.7 | 0.834 |
| Postoperative | 131.4±10.1 | 129.0±12.2 | 0.008 |
| Change | 11.6±24.2 | 8.8±19.5 | 0.113 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.
Group A patients who received the Attune prosthesis.
Group B patients who received the PFC Sigma prosthesis.
Comparison of the Radiographic Results between the Groups
| Variable | Group A | Group B | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mechanical axis (°) | |||
| Preoperative | −11.6±6.6 | −11.7±7.5 | 0.751 |
| Postoperative | −0.9±2.6 | −1.2±2.8 | 0.101 |
| Change | 10.7±6.6 | 10.5±7.1 | 0.145 |
| Position of components (°) | |||
| α angle | 95.4±1.7 | 95.0±1.6 | 0.102 |
| β angle | 90.8±2.1 | 90.6±2.2 | 0.158 |
| γ angle | 2.3±2.9 | 1.5±2.3 | 0.091 |
| δ angle | 88.7±2.5 | 88.5±2.1 | 0.101 |
| Patellar thickness (mm) | |||
| Preoperative | 23.1±3.0 | 23.6±3.0 | 0.088 |
| Postoperative | 23.9±2.3 | 24.2±2.5 | 0.073 |
| Change | 0.7±2.9 | 0.6±3.4 | 0.799 |
| T hickness of the residual patella (mm) | 14.8±2.1 | 15.7±2.4 | <0.001 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.
Group A patients who received the Attune prosthesis.
Group B patients who received the PFC Sigma prosthesis.
Comparison of the Distribution of Residual Patellar Thickness
| Thickness (mm) | Group A | Group B | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| No. of subjects | Cumulative (%) | No. of subjects | Cumulative (%) | |
| <12 | 23 | 7.5 | 6 | 2.1 |
| 12–14 | 88 | 36.9 | 66 | 23.9 |
| 14–16 | 115 | 75.3 | 122 | 64.8 |
| 16–18 | 52 | 92.5 | 57 | 83.8 |
| 18–20 | 16 | 97.9 | 36 | 95.8 |
| 20–22 | 6 | 100 | 9 | 98.6 |
| 24–26 | 0 | 100 | 2 | 99.3 |
| 26–28 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 99.3 |
| 28–30 | 0 | 100 | 2 | 100 |
Thickness of the residual patella.
Group A patients who received the Attune prosthesis.
Group B patients who received the PFC Sigma prosthesis.
The proportion of high-risk cases with a residual patellar thickness of less than 12 mm was significantly different between the groups (p=0.003).