Sando Takashi, McCalden Richard W, Bourne Robert B, MacDonald Steven J, Somerville Lyndsay E
Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, London Health Science Centre, University Campus, London, Ontario, Canada; University Hospital, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
J Arthroplasty. 2015 Feb;30(2):210-5. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.09.009. Epub 2014 Sep 28.
We compared the 10-year survival rates and clinical outcomes of posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) versus posterior cruciate-substituting (CS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA), using the Genesis II knee system (Smith and Nephew, Memphis, TN). Our institutional database identified patients undergoing a primary knee with the Genesis II system between 1995 and 2000. These patients were followed for an average of 12.3years (range 10.2-14.4years). There were 143 (34.5%) CR and 271 (65.5%) CS implants. No significant difference in 10-year survivorship was noted between the two cohorts. The postoperative clinical scores (KSCRS, WOMAC, SF-12) and knee ROM were significantly better for the CS cohort. In this large, long-term, single-implant prospective study, CS performed better than CR in terms of clinical scores and range of motion.
我们使用Genesis II膝关节系统(史赛克公司,田纳西州孟菲斯)比较了后交叉韧带保留型(CR)与后交叉韧带替代型(CS)全膝关节置换术(TKA)的10年生存率和临床结果。我们的机构数据库确定了1995年至2000年间使用Genesis II系统进行初次膝关节置换的患者。这些患者平均随访了12.3年(范围10.2 - 14.4年)。共有143例(34.5%)CR型和271例(65.5%)CS型植入物。两个队列之间的10年生存率没有显著差异。CS队列的术后临床评分(KSCRS、WOMAC、SF - 12)和膝关节活动度明显更好。在这项大型、长期、单植入物前瞻性研究中,CS在临床评分和活动范围方面比CR表现更好。