Kim Young-Hoo, Choi Yoowang, Kwon Oh-Ryong, Kim Jun-Shik
The Joint Replacement Center of Korea at Ewha Womans University, MokDong Hospital 911-1, MokDong, YangCheon-Ku, Seoul, 158-710 South Korea.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Apr;91(4):753-60. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00805.
Although the design features of the high-flexion posterior cruciate-retaining and high-flexion posterior cruciate-substituting total knee prostheses reportedly improve the range of knee motion, a clinical comparison of both systems with regard to range of motion has not been reported, to our knowledge. The purpose of the present study was to compare the range of motion and functional outcome in knees receiving either a high-flexion posterior cruciate-retaining or a high-flexion posterior cruciate-substituting total knee prosthesis.
Two hundred and fifty patients (mean age, 71.6 years) received a high-flexion posterior cruciate-retaining total knee prosthesis in one knee and a high-flexion posterior cruciate-substituting total knee prosthesis in the contralateral knee. Ten patients were men, and 240 were women. At the time of each follow-up (minimum duration of follow-up, two years; mean, 2.3 years), the patients were assessed clinically and radiographically with use of the knee-rating systems of the Knee Society and the Hospital for Special Surgery. In addition, each patient completed the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) questionnaire. Non-weight-bearing and weight-bearing ranges of knee motion were determined in both groups.
The mean postoperative Knee Society knee score was 94 points for the knees treated with a high-flexion cruciate-retaining prosthesis and 95 points for those treated with a high-flexion posterior cruciate-substituting prosthesis. The mean postoperative Hospital for Special Surgery knee score was 90 points for the knees that had been treated with a high-flexion posterior cruciate-retaining prosthesis and 91 points for those that had been treated with the high-flexion posterior cruciate-substituting prosthesis. At the time of the latest follow-up, the knees that had been treated with a high-flexion posterior cruciate-retaining prosthesis had a mean non-weight-bearing range of motion of 133 degrees and a mean weight-bearing range of motion of 118 degrees. The knees that had been treated with a high-flexion posterior cruciate-substituting prosthesis had a mean non-weight-bearing range of motion of 135 degrees and a mean weight-bearing range of motion of 122 degrees. No knee had aseptic loosening, revision, or osteolysis.
After a minimum duration of follow-up of two years, there was no difference in range of motion or clinical and radiographic results between knees that had received a high-flexion posterior cruciate-retaining total knee prosthesis and those that had received a high-flexion posterior cruciate-substituting total knee prosthesis.
据报道,高屈曲后交叉韧带保留型和高屈曲后交叉韧带替代型全膝关节假体的设计特点可改善膝关节活动范围,但就我们所知,尚未有关于这两种系统在活动范围方面的临床比较报道。本研究的目的是比较接受高屈曲后交叉韧带保留型或高屈曲后交叉韧带替代型全膝关节假体的膝关节的活动范围和功能结果。
250例患者(平均年龄71.6岁),一侧膝关节接受高屈曲后交叉韧带保留型全膝关节假体,对侧膝关节接受高屈曲后交叉韧带替代型全膝关节假体。其中男性10例,女性240例。每次随访时(随访最短持续时间为两年;平均2.3年),使用膝关节协会和特种外科医院的膝关节评分系统对患者进行临床和影像学评估。此外,每位患者完成西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎(WOMAC)问卷。测定两组患者膝关节的非负重和负重活动范围。
接受高屈曲后交叉韧带保留型假体治疗的膝关节术后膝关节协会膝关节平均评分为94分,接受高屈曲后交叉韧带替代型假体治疗的膝关节为95分。接受高屈曲后交叉韧带保留型假体治疗的膝关节术后特种外科医院膝关节平均评分为90分,接受高屈曲后交叉韧带替代型假体治疗的膝关节为91分。在最近一次随访时,接受高屈曲后交叉韧带保留型假体治疗的膝关节非负重平均活动范围为133度,负重平均活动范围为118度。接受高屈曲后交叉韧带替代型假体治疗的膝关节非负重平均活动范围为135度,负重平均活动范围为122度。没有膝关节出现无菌性松动、翻修或骨溶解。
在至少两年的随访期后,接受高屈曲后交叉韧带保留型全膝关节假体的膝关节与接受高屈曲后交叉韧带替代型全膝关节假体的膝关节在活动范围或临床及影像学结果方面没有差异。