Mid Term Results of Total Knee Arthroplasty (8 to 10 Years)

Dong-Chul Lee; Oog-Jin Shon; Chul-Hyun Park; Man-Ho Lee

doi:10.4055/jkoa.2010.45.3.198

Journal List > J Korean Orthop Assoc > v.45(3) > 1012990

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Lee, Shon, Park, and Lee: Mid Term Results of Total Knee Arthroplasty (8 to 10 Years)

Original Article

Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association

Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association 2010; 45(3): 198-203.

Published online: 9 June 2010

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4055/jkoa.2010.45.3.198

Mid Term Results of Total Knee Arthroplasty (8 to 10 Years)

Dong-Chul Lee, M.D., Oog-Jin Shon, M.D., Chul-Hyun Park, M.D., Man-Ho Lee, M.D.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yeungnam University Hospital, Daegu, Korea.

Correspondence to: Oog-Jin Shon, M.D. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yeungnam University Hospital, 317-1, Daemyeong-dong, Nam-gu, Daegu 705-717, Korea. TEL: +82-53-620-3640, FAX: +82-53-628-4020, ossoj@med.yu.ac.kr

Received 29 January 2009 Accepted 12 April 2010

(open-access):

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

We wanted to evaluate the mid-term (8 to 10 years) clinical and radiologic results of total knee arthroplasty.

Materials and Methods

We evaluated 71 knees in 45 patients after they had undergone total knee arthroplasty between January 1996 and April 1998. All the procedures were performed by a single-surgeon using the PFC (Press Fit Condylar) system. The clinical and radiologic results were evaluated using the American Knee Society Scoring System and the American Knee Society Roentgenographic Evaluation and Scoring System. Survivorship analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method with revision for any reason as the end point.

Results

The average range of motion of the knee joint was 102.7° (55-130°) preoperatively and 116.4° (90-140°) at the last follow-up. The average knee and functional scores were improved from 46.2 and 42 preoperatively to 88.7 and 82.9, respectively, at the last follow-up. The tibiofemoral angle changed from varus 6.5° preoperatively to valgus 4.6° at the last follow-up. The total radiolucecy rate was 34% and the total radiolucency score was 1.9. Reimplantations were performed in 5 cases and the survival rate was 94.7% at 8 years. No differences was found in the survival rate according to PCL preservation.

Conclusion

The mid-term results of PFC total knee arthroplasty were reliable and satisfactory because there was an increased range of motion, decreased pain, restoration of function and a relatively low complication rate.

Keywords: knee, PFC total knee arthroplasty, mid term results

Figures and Tables

Table 1

Change of Range of Motion after Operation

Table 2

Comparison of Knee and Functional Score between Preoperative and Last Follow-up

Table 3

Clinical Results according to Preoperative Varus Deformity and Flexion Contracture

Table 4

Clinical Results according to BMI

References

1. Buehler KO, Venn-Watson E, D'Lima DD, Colwell CW Jr. The press-fit condylar total knee system: 8- to 10-year results with a posterior cruciate-retaining design. J Arthroplasty. 2000. 15:698–701.

2. Freeman MA, Mcleod HC, Leval JP. Cementless fixation of prosthetic components in total arthroplasty of the knee and hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983. 176:88–94.

3. Khaw FM, Kirk LM, Gregg PJ. Survival analysis of cemented Press-Fit Condylar total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2001. 16:161–167.

4. Bea DK, Lee YH, Chung SW. The Study of Anatomical Measurement of Distal Femur and Compatibility of Femoral Prosthesis in Total Knee Arthroplasty. J Korean Orthop Assoc. 2002. 37:204–210.

5. Bea DK, Kwon OS, Lee YH, Moon JS. The Results of PFC Total Knee Arthroplasty - comparative study of cruciate retaining versus substitution and cement versus cementless fixation. J Korean Orthop Assoc. 2002. 37:347–352.

6. Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989. 248:13–14.

7. Bellamy N. Pain assessment in osteoarthritis: experience with the WOMAC osteoarthritis index. Semin Arthritis Reum. 1989. 18:4 Suppl 2. 14–17.

8. Martin SD, McManus JL, Scott RD, Thornhill TS. Pressfit condylar total knee arthroplasty. 5-to 9 year follow up evaluation. J Arthroplasty. 1997. 12:603–614.

9. Ranawat CS, Boachie-Adjei O. Survivorship analysis and results of total condylar knee arthroplasty. Eight-to 11-year follow-up period. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988. 226:6–13.

10. Rand JA, Ilstrup DM. Survivorship analysis of total knee arthroplasty. Cumulative rates of survival of 9200 total knee ar. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1991. 73:397–409.

11. Callahan CM, Drake BG, Heck DA, Dittus RS. Patient out-following tricompartmental total knee replacement: a metaanalysis. JAMA. 1994. 271:1349–1357.

12. Harvey IA, Barry K, Kirby SPJ, Johnson R, Elloy MA. Factors affecting the range of movement of total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993. 75:950–955.

13. Font-Rodriguez DE, Scuderi GR, Insall JN. Survivorship of cemented total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997. 345:79–86.

14. Stern SH, Insall JN. Posterior stabilized prosthesis. Results after follow-up of nine to twelve years. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992. 74:980–986.

15. Ewald FC. The knee society total knee arthroplasty roentgenoevaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989. 248:9–12.

16. King TV, Scott RD. Femoral component loosening in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985. 194:285–290.

17. Fetzer GB, Callaghan JJ, Templeton JE, Goetz DD, Sullivan PM, Kelley SS. Posterior cruciate-retaining modular total knee arthroplasty: a 9- to 12-year follow-up investigation. J Arthro. 2001. 17:961–966.

18. Mikulak SA, Mahoney OM, dela Rosa MA, Schmalzried TP. Loosening and osteolysis with the press-fit condylar posteriorcruciate-substituting total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001. 83:398–403.

19. Casey D, Cottrell J, DiCarlo E, Windsor R, Wright T. PFC knee replacement: osteolytic failures from extreme polyethyldegradation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007. 464:157–163.

20. Lavernia CJ, Sierra RJ, Hungerford DS, Krackow K. Activity level and wear in total knee arthroplasty: a study of autopsy retrieved specimens. J Arthroplasty. 2001. 16:446–453.

21. Ayers DC. Polyethylene wear and osteolysis following total knee replacement. Instr Course Lect. 1997. 46:205–213.

22. Chung HK, Choi CH, Kim JH, Lee SB. Hybrid total knee rearthroplasty-minimum 5 years follow-up. J Korean Orthop Assoc. 2000. 35:27–32.

23. Rand JA. Cement or cementless fixation in total knee arthro plasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991. 273:52–62.

24. Lotke PA, Ecker ML. Influence of positioning of prosthesis in total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1977. 59:77–79.

TOOLS

Similar articles