>Acta Ortopédica Mexicana
>Year 2002, Issue 2
Carriedo REG, Torres RF, Abrego ACE, Vega HR, Valdés ML
Total knee prosthesis, stabilized or not-stabilized. Comparative trial
Acta Ortop Mex 2002; 16 (2)
PDF: 4. Kb.
Objective. Present prospective trial has been outlined for comparison between the results obtained in two groups of patients, one with total knee prosthesis that preserves on the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) and other in which ligament is removed. Material and methods. From November 1996 through December 2000, 300 patients were randomly classified into two groups of 150 each. Age ranged from 56 to 87 years. Gross sex ratio was always greater for women with 3:1 or 2:1 according groups. Group A patients (35 male, 115 female) were operated on for total knee prosthesis, condylar type, preserving the PCL while in those for group B (47 male, 103 female) PCL was removed for a stabilized prosthesis. Follow-up was from 2 months to 4 years. Causes that indicated surgery for groups A and B were: primary osteoarthritis 59 and 47%, osteoarthritis because of angular deformity 16 and 30%, traumatic arthritis 10 and 11%, rheumatoid arthritis 13 and 6% and metabolic arthritis 1.3 and 4%. Results. No significant difference was found between two groups in regard to: maximum operating time 120 and 110 min., transoperative bleeding 750 and 600 ml, absence of pain 110 and 111 knees, need of a cane for walking 109 and 90 and normal range of motion 103 and 104, however as an observation, a somewhat standard better knee extension was achieved in cases who had stabilized prosthesis. Complications were: deep venous thrombosis in 30 and 20 cases, long-lasting edema only in 17 of group B and one case of pulmonar embolia in group B. Conclusion. There are no true difference between results of removing or not the PCL as a technique for applying a stabilized or not total knee prosthesis.
||knee, prosthesis, stability, comparative trial.
Back DL, Cannon SR, Hilton A, Bankes MJ, Briggs TW. The Kinemax total knee arthroplasty. Nine years’ experience. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001; 83(3): 359-63.
Calder JD, Ashwood N, Hollingdale JP. Survivorship analysis of the “Performance” total knee replacement 7 years follow up. Int Orthop 1999; 23(2): 100-3.
Francke EI, Lachiewicz PF. Failure of a cemented all-polyethylene patellar component of a press fit condylar total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2000; 15(2): 234-7.
Griffin FM, Insall JN, Scuderi GR. Accurancy of soft tissue balancing in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2000; 15(8): 970-3.
Grill GS, Joshi AB. Long term results of retention of the posterior cruciate ligament in total knee replacement in rheumatoid arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001; 83(3): 359-63.
Huang CH, Yang CY, Cheng CK. Fracture of the femoral component associated with polyethylene wear and osteolysis after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1999; 14(3): 375-9.
Jenny JY, Jenny C. Preservation of anterior cruciate ligament in total knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1998; 118(3): 145-8.
Kaper BB, Smith PN, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, Robertson D. Medium-term results of a mobile bearing total knee replacement. Clin Orthop 1999; (367): 201-9.
Koning A, Walter M, Kirschner S, Golhhlke F. Balance sheets and knee functional scores 5 years after total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a source for patient information. J Arthroplasty 2000; 15(3): 289-94.
Krugluger J, Steinwenter A, Knabr K. Uncemented Miller Galante total knee replacement the influence of alignment on clinical and radiological outcome in a 5 to 8 year follow up. Int Orthop 1998; 22(4): 230-3.
Lattanzio PJ, Chess DG, MacDermid JC. Effect of the posterior cruciate ligament in knee-joint propioception in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1998; 13(5): 580-5.
LasKing RS, Maruyama Y, Villanueva M, Bourne R. Deep Dish congruent tibial component use in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized prospective study. Clin Orthop 2000; (380): 36-44.
Lonner JH, Hershman S, Mont M, Lotke PA. Total knee arthroplasty patients 40 years and younger with osteoarthritis. Clin Orthop 2000; (380): 85-90.
Lonner JH, Lotke PA, Aseptic complications after total knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 1999; 7(5): 311-24.
Mabrey JD, Toohey JS, Armstrong DA, Laverly L, Wammack LA. Clinical pathway management of total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop1997; (345): 125-33.
Martin SD, Scott RD, Thornhill TS. Current concepts of total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Sports Phy 1998; 28(4): 252-61.
Matsuda S, Miura H, Nagamine R, Urabe K, Harimaya K. Changes in knee alignment after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1999; 14(5): 566-70.
Mirza AH, Noble J, Teamby D. Infected knee treated by total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2000; 17(3): 171-4.
Pap G, Meyer M, Weiler HT, Machner A. Propioception after total knee arthroplasty: a comparison with clinical outcome. Acta Orthop Scand 2000; 71(2): 153-9.
Partington PF, Sawhney J, Rorabeck CH. Joint line restoration after revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 1999; (367): 165-71.
Rathjen KW. Surgical treatment. Total knee arthroplasty. Am J Knee Surg 1998; 11(1): 58-63.
Rorabeck CH. Total knee replacement; Should it be cemented or hybrid? Can J Surg 1999; 42 (1): 21-6.
Su DH, Chan CW, Seuw KH. Results of revision total knee arthroplasty. Singapore Med J 2000; 41(1): 6-8.
Szabo G, Lovasz G, Kustos T. Prospective comparative analysis of morbility in osteoarthritic knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2000; 82(8): 1167-9.
Uvbehammer J. Knee joint fixations and function related to joint area design in total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 2001; 72(2): 213.
>Acta Ortopédica Mexicana
>Year 2002, Issue 2