Acta Orthop Belg. 2020 Sep;86(3):482-488.
A range of different total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs have been developed, each specifically designed to relieve pain and restore knee function with the greatest possible patient satisfaction. The purpose of this study was to compare a posterior stabilized design and a cruciate-retaining design. We hypothesized that a cruciate-retaining design would have a higher Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) than a posterior stabilized design. Ninety-two patients were used in our analysis (46 patients in each group) involving TKA (Attune, Depuy-Synthes) between January 2014 and March 2015. We excluded patients with valgus alignment, post-traumatic arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis and major previous surgery on the knee. We compared the FJS, the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and their ceiling effects. FJS was significantly higher in the fixed-bearing cruciate-retaining group (P=0.043). The mean (-SD) FJS for the cruciate-retaining group was 78,4-25.1 compared to 67.6-27.6 for the posterior stabilized group. No significant difference in OKS was detected. The total ceiling effect for FJS and OKS was 32.2% and 45.5%, respectively. In conclusion, patients with cruciate-retaining TKA showed a better FJS in comparison to posterior stabilized TKA. FJS has a higher discriminatory power compared to OKS.
已经开发出了一系列不同的全膝关节置换术(TKA)设计,每种设计都专门用于缓解疼痛并恢复膝关节功能,以实现最大程度的患者满意度。本研究的目的是比较后稳定型设计和保留交叉韧带型设计。我们假设保留交叉韧带型设计的 FJS(遗忘关节评分)会高于后稳定型设计。我们的分析纳入了 92 名患者(每组 46 名患者),涉及 2014 年 1 月至 2015 年 3 月之间进行的 TKA(Attune、Depuy-Synthes)。我们排除了有外翻畸形、创伤后关节炎、类风湿关节炎和膝关节主要既往手术的患者。我们比较了 FJS、牛津膝关节评分(OKS)及其天花板效应。固定轴承保留交叉韧带型组的 FJS 显著更高(P=0.043)。保留交叉韧带型组的 FJS 平均(SD)为 78.4-25.1,而后稳定型组为 67.6-27.6。OKS 无显著差异。FJS 和 OKS 的总天花板效应分别为 32.2%和 45.5%。总之,与后稳定型 TKA 相比,保留交叉韧带型 TKA 的患者 FJS 更好。FJS 比 OKS 具有更高的区分能力。