Ekasame Vanitcharoenkul1, Aasis Unnanuntana2. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand. 2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand. uaasis@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The ATTUNE Knee System is a new prosthetic design that has theoretical advantages over the Press Fit Condylar (PFC) Sigma Knee System specific to improved knee kinematics and patellofemoral joint tracking. This study aimed to evaluate functional outcomes compared between the ATTUNE and PFC Sigma designs at a minimum follow-up of 5 years. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data from total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients who received either the ATTUNE or PFC Sigma system during November 2013 to February 2015 at Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand). Functional outcomes were evaluated using Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, 2-min walk test (2MWT), modified knee score, numerical rating scale-pain, range of motion (ROM), and rate of anterior knee pain and crepitation at preoperation, 3-months, 1-year, and 5-years postoperatively. RESULTS: Of 113 patients, 59 and 54 received the PFC Sigma and ATTUNE systems, respectively. At a minimum of 5-years follow-up, all functional outcomes improved significantly from the preoperative period although TUG test and 2MWT declined significantly from 1- to 5-years postoperatively only in the PFC Sigma group. The mean ROM at 5-years postoperatively was significantly higher in ATTUNE than in PFC Sigma; however, the difference was small (116° vs. 110°, respectively; p = 0.041). There were no significant differences in any of the other outcome measurements, including anterior knee pain, clunking, and crepitation, between groups at any study time point. CONCLUSIONS: Our results revealed no major differences in functional outcomes between the PFC Sigma and ATTUNE TKA designs at an intermediate-term follow-up of at least 5 years. Longer-term follow-up study is needed to evaluate the benefits of the ATTUNE design relative to polyethylene wear and the rate of aseptic loosening.
BACKGROUND: The ATTUNE Knee System is a new prosthetic design that has theoretical advantages over the Press Fit Condylar (PFC) Sigma Knee System specific to improved knee kinematics and patellofemoral joint tracking. This study aimed to evaluate functional outcomes compared between the ATTUNE and PFC Sigma designs at a minimum follow-up of 5 years. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data from total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients who received either the ATTUNE or PFC Sigma system during November 2013 to February 2015 at Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand). Functional outcomes were evaluated using Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, 2-min walk test (2MWT), modified knee score, numerical rating scale-pain, range of motion (ROM), and rate of anterior knee pain and crepitation at preoperation, 3-months, 1-year, and 5-years postoperatively. RESULTS: Of 113 patients, 59 and 54 received the PFC Sigma and ATTUNE systems, respectively. At a minimum of 5-years follow-up, all functional outcomes improved significantly from the preoperative period although TUG test and 2MWT declined significantly from 1- to 5-years postoperatively only in the PFC Sigma group. The mean ROM at 5-years postoperatively was significantly higher in ATTUNE than in PFC Sigma; however, the difference was small (116° vs. 110°, respectively; p = 0.041). There were no significant differences in any of the other outcome measurements, including anterior knee pain, clunking, and crepitation, between groups at any study time point. CONCLUSIONS: Our results revealed no major differences in functional outcomes between the PFC Sigma and ATTUNE TKA designs at an intermediate-term follow-up of at least 5 years. Longer-term follow-up study is needed to evaluate the benefits of the ATTUNE design relative to polyethylene wear and the rate of aseptic loosening.
Authors: Sean D Toomey; Juan A Daccach; Jinesh C Shah; Sam E Himden; James P Lesko; William G Hamilton Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2017-04-20 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Wolf Petersen; Ingo Volker Rembitzki; Gerd-Peter Brüggemann; Andree Ellermann; Raymond Best; Andreas Gösele- Koppenburg; Christian Liebau Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2013-09-22 Impact factor: 3.075