A Comparison of Medial-congruent, Ultracongruent, and Cruciate-retaining Bearings Using a Single Cruciate-retaining Total Knee Design

IF 2.1 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS Arthroplasty Today Pub Date : 2025-02-10 DOI:10.1016/j.artd.2025.101632
Alexander V. Strait MS , Eric J. Wilson MD , Henry Ho MS , Kevin B. Fricka MD , Robert A. Sershon MD
{"title":"A Comparison of Medial-congruent, Ultracongruent, and Cruciate-retaining Bearings Using a Single Cruciate-retaining Total Knee Design","authors":"Alexander V. Strait MS ,&nbsp;Eric J. Wilson MD ,&nbsp;Henry Ho MS ,&nbsp;Kevin B. Fricka MD ,&nbsp;Robert A. Sershon MD","doi":"10.1016/j.artd.2025.101632","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Improving outcomes has driven advancements in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) bearing design. The aim of this study was to compare medial-congruent (MC), ultracongruent (UC), and cruciate-retaining (CR) TKA utilizing a single CR total knee system.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Six surgeons performed 2883 primary TKAs from 2012 to 2022 using the same implant design, comprised of 708 MC, 799 UC, and 1376 CR bearings. Prospectively collected data on clinical and patient-reported outcome measures were compared. Data analyses utilized analysis of variance tests for continuous data, <em>chi</em>-square tests for categorical data, and Mantel-Cox tests for survivorship analysis. MC subjects were older (MC = 67.5 vs UC = 65.3 vs CR = 66.7 years; <em>P</em> &lt; .001), had lower body mass index (MC = 32.4 vs UC = 33.1 vs CR = 33.2 kg/m<sup>2</sup>; <em>P</em> = .04), and had shorter mean follow-up (MC = 1.2 vs UC = 2.4 vs CR = 2.9 years; <em>P</em> &lt; .001).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>All groups experienced similar rates of 90-day complications (MC = 26/708, 3.7% vs UC = 39/799, 4.9% vs CR = 52/1376, 3.8%; <em>P</em> = .38) and revisions (MC = 1/708, 0.1% vs UC = 4/799, 0.5% vs CR = 5/1376, 0.4%; <em>P</em> = .49). Survivorship was similar at 2 years (<em>P</em> = .41) and above 98% at 5 years for all groups. At the 1-year follow-up, MC bearings had significantly greater Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health Physical (MC = 47.1 vs UC = 41.5 vs CR = 42.8; <em>P</em> &lt; .001) and mental scores (MC = 48.9 vs UC = 41.3 vs CR = 43.7; <em>P</em> &lt; .001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>No differences in all-cause complications or revisions were observed for MC, UC, and CR bearings using the same total knee system. Clinically important differences favoring MC bearings were found with Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health Physical scores at 1 year; however, longer follow-up is necessary to determine if this trend holds.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37940,"journal":{"name":"Arthroplasty Today","volume":"32 ","pages":"Article 101632"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroplasty Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352344125000196","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Improving outcomes has driven advancements in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) bearing design. The aim of this study was to compare medial-congruent (MC), ultracongruent (UC), and cruciate-retaining (CR) TKA utilizing a single CR total knee system.

Methods

Six surgeons performed 2883 primary TKAs from 2012 to 2022 using the same implant design, comprised of 708 MC, 799 UC, and 1376 CR bearings. Prospectively collected data on clinical and patient-reported outcome measures were compared. Data analyses utilized analysis of variance tests for continuous data, chi-square tests for categorical data, and Mantel-Cox tests for survivorship analysis. MC subjects were older (MC = 67.5 vs UC = 65.3 vs CR = 66.7 years; P < .001), had lower body mass index (MC = 32.4 vs UC = 33.1 vs CR = 33.2 kg/m2; P = .04), and had shorter mean follow-up (MC = 1.2 vs UC = 2.4 vs CR = 2.9 years; P < .001).

Results

All groups experienced similar rates of 90-day complications (MC = 26/708, 3.7% vs UC = 39/799, 4.9% vs CR = 52/1376, 3.8%; P = .38) and revisions (MC = 1/708, 0.1% vs UC = 4/799, 0.5% vs CR = 5/1376, 0.4%; P = .49). Survivorship was similar at 2 years (P = .41) and above 98% at 5 years for all groups. At the 1-year follow-up, MC bearings had significantly greater Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health Physical (MC = 47.1 vs UC = 41.5 vs CR = 42.8; P < .001) and mental scores (MC = 48.9 vs UC = 41.3 vs CR = 43.7; P < .001).

Conclusions

No differences in all-cause complications or revisions were observed for MC, UC, and CR bearings using the same total knee system. Clinically important differences favoring MC bearings were found with Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health Physical scores at 1 year; however, longer follow-up is necessary to determine if this trend holds.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用单一的全膝关节设计的内侧一致、超一致和保持十字架轴承的比较
研究背景:预后的改善推动了全膝关节置换术(TKA)轴承设计的进步。本研究的目的是比较使用单一CR全膝关节系统的中一致(MC)、超一致(UC)和交叉关节保留(CR) TKA。方法2012年至2022年,6名外科医生使用相同的种植体设计进行了2883例原发性tka,包括708个MC, 799个UC和1376个CR轴承。对前瞻性收集的临床数据和患者报告的结果进行比较。数据分析对连续数据采用方差分析检验,对分类数据采用卡方检验,对生存分析采用Mantel-Cox检验。MC受试者年龄较大(MC = 67.5 vs UC = 65.3 vs CR = 66.7;P & lt;.001),体重指数较低(MC = 32.4 vs UC = 33.1 vs CR = 33.2 kg/m2;P = .04),平均随访时间较短(MC = 1.2年vs UC = 2.4年vs CR = 2.9年;P & lt;措施)。结果各组90天并发症发生率相似(MC = 26/708, 3.7% vs UC = 39/799, 4.9% vs CR = 52/1376, 3.8%;P = .38)和修正(MC = 1/708, 0.1% vs UC = 4/799, 0.5% vs CR = 5/1376, 0.4%;P = .49)。2年生存率相似(P = 0.41), 5年生存率均在98%以上。在1年的随访中,MC轴承的患者报告结果测量信息系统全球健康体质(MC = 47.1 vs UC = 41.5 vs CR = 42.8)显著更高;P & lt;.001)和心理评分(MC = 48.9 vs UC = 41.3 vs CR = 43.7;P & lt;措施)。结论MC、UC和CR轴承使用相同的全膝关节系统在全因并发症或修复方面没有差异。患者报告的结果测量信息系统全球健康体质评分在1年后发现有利于MC轴承的临床重要差异;然而,需要更长时间的随访来确定这一趋势是否持续。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Arthroplasty Today
Arthroplasty Today Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
258
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊介绍: Arthroplasty Today is a companion journal to the Journal of Arthroplasty. The journal Arthroplasty Today brings together the clinical and scientific foundations for joint replacement of the hip and knee in an open-access, online format. Arthroplasty Today solicits manuscripts of the highest quality from all areas of scientific endeavor that relate to joint replacement or the treatment of its complications, including those dealing with patient outcomes, economic and policy issues, prosthetic design, biomechanics, biomaterials, and biologic response to arthroplasty. The journal focuses on case reports. It is the purpose of Arthroplasty Today to present material to practicing orthopaedic surgeons that will keep them abreast of developments in the field, prove useful in the care of patients, and aid in understanding the scientific foundation of this subspecialty area of joint replacement. The international members of the Editorial Board provide a worldwide perspective for the journal''s area of interest. Their participation ensures that each issue of Arthroplasty Today provides the reader with timely, peer-reviewed articles of the highest quality.
期刊最新文献
Long-Term Risk of Prosthetic Joint Infection in Patients With Hypoalbuminemia Following Hip or Knee Arthroplasty. Outcomes of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty in Patients Receiving Glucagon-like Peptide 1 Agonist Therapy: A Matched Cohort Study. Three-Dimensional Hands-on Total Hip Arthroplasty Simulation After Surgically Treated Acetabular Fractures: A Technical Note on 8 Cases. Periprosthetic Joint Infection Caused by Brucella: Four Case Reports and a Systematic Review of Literature. Alignment Philosophies in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Comprehensive Narrative Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1