Jia Long Chua1, Graham Seow-Hng Goh1, Ming Han Lincoln Liow2, Darren Keng-Jin Tay1, Ngai-Nung Lo1, Seng-Jin Yeo1. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, 20 College Road, Academia, Level 4, Singapore, 169865, Singapore. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, 20 College Road, Academia, Level 4, Singapore, 169865, Singapore. dr.lincoln.liow@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare patient-reported outcomes measures, health-related quality of life and satisfaction rates between a new Modern TKA system (M-TKA) and an existing Traditional TKA system (T-TKA). METHODS: Prospectively collected registry data of 65 patients who underwent T-TKA and 65 patients who underwent M-TKA at a single institution from 2014 to 2015 was reviewed. The range of motion, Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS), Function Score (KSFS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), SF-36, satisfaction and expectation fulfilment were compared at Pre-op, 6 months and 2 years. Patellofemoral joint-related OKS subscores (3, 5, 7, 12) were also compared between the groups. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in OKS/SF-36 were analysed for both groups. Propensity scores generated using logistic regression were used to adjust for confounding variables, thus allowing matching of T-TKA to M-TKA in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS: Both groups showed a significant improvement in all measured variables at 6 month and 2 years (p < 0.001) when compared to baseline. There was no significant difference in KSKS, KSFS, OKS, SF-36 and Patellofemoral joint-related OKS subscores (3, 5, 7, 12) between the two groups (n.s.). At 2 years, there were high satisfaction rates of 89.2% and 92.2% in the T-TKA and M-TKA groups, respectively (n.s.). Similarly, both groups demonstrated high expectation fulfilment rates of 84.6% and 90.6% for the T-TKA and M-TKA groups, respectively (n.s.). CONCLUSION: Using an extensive battery of standardized patient-reported, health-related quality of life and MCID assessments, our study demonstrated no difference in clinical outcomes between M-TKA and T-TKA that would justify the use of the newer and costlier M-TKA. Longer follow-up is necessary to evaluate the possible advantages of this new implant design. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective Study.
PURPOSE: To compare patient-reported outcomes measures, health-related quality of life and satisfaction rates between a new Modern TKA system (M-TKA) and an existing Traditional TKA system (T-TKA). METHODS: Prospectively collected registry data of 65 patients who underwent T-TKA and 65 patients who underwent M-TKA at a single institution from 2014 to 2015 was reviewed. The range of motion, Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS), Function Score (KSFS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), SF-36, satisfaction and expectation fulfilment were compared at Pre-op, 6 months and 2 years. Patellofemoral joint-related OKS subscores (3, 5, 7, 12) were also compared between the groups. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in OKS/SF-36 were analysed for both groups. Propensity scores generated using logistic regression were used to adjust for confounding variables, thus allowing matching of T-TKA to M-TKA in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS: Both groups showed a significant improvement in all measured variables at 6 month and 2 years (p < 0.001) when compared to baseline. There was no significant difference in KSKS, KSFS, OKS, SF-36 and Patellofemoral joint-related OKS subscores (3, 5, 7, 12) between the two groups (n.s.). At 2 years, there were high satisfaction rates of 89.2% and 92.2% in the T-TKA and M-TKA groups, respectively (n.s.). Similarly, both groups demonstrated high expectation fulfilment rates of 84.6% and 90.6% for the T-TKA and M-TKA groups, respectively (n.s.). CONCLUSION: Using an extensive battery of standardized patient-reported, health-related quality of life and MCID assessments, our study demonstrated no difference in clinical outcomes between M-TKA and T-TKA that would justify the use of the newer and costlier M-TKA. Longer follow-up is necessary to evaluate the possible advantages of this new implant design. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective Study.
Entities:
Keywords:
Attune; MCID; Outcomes; PFC Sigma; Quality of life; Satisfaction; TKA; TKR; Total knee arthroplasty; Total knee replacement
Authors: Patrick Reinbacher; Ulrike Wittig; Georg Hauer; Alexander Draschl; Andreas Leithner; Patrick Sadoghi Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 2.928
Authors: Bart L Kaptein; Peter den Hollander; Bregje Thomassen; Martha Fiocco; Rob G H H Nelissen Journal: Bone Joint J Date: 2020-09 Impact factor: 5.082
Authors: Sunil K Panchani; Hiren M Divecha; Rebecca Lafferty; George Pavlou; Jez Oakley; Debbie Shaw; Amol Chitre; Henry Wynn Jones; Videsh Raut; Robert Smith; Anil Gambhir; Tim Board Journal: JB JS Open Access Date: 2021-07-28