14-Year Median Follow-Up Using the Press-Fit Condylar Sigma Design for Total Knee Arthroplasty

Excellent Survival and Good Outcomes at 15 Years Using the Press-Fit Condylar Sigma Total Knee Arthroplasty

“…Using an end-point of revision for any reason, implant survival in our cohort was 92.3% at 15 years, and using revision for aseptic loosening as an end-point survival was 94.4%. Prior to our study, the longest follow-up for this prosthesis had been a single-surgeon series of 79 TKRs, in which Patil et al reported 14-year survival of 97% using revision for any reason and 100% using loosening as end-points [12]. Accounting for length of follow-up our results are comparable, suggesting ongoing durability for this prosthesis and supporting its continued use.Previous studies assessing long-term survivorship of the original PFC TKR have quoted survival rates from 84.6%[8] to 92.6%[5] at 15 years; the latter results reported in a singlesurgeon series of 139 TKRs in Boston, Massachusetts, where the prosthesis was designed.…”

“…[10] We have previously reported results of this device up to ten years post-implantation, demonstrating all-cause survivorship of 95.9% and survivorship for aseptic loosening of 98.7%. [11] Studies extending beyond ten years are scarce, [12] but suggest the decline in implant survival observed in the original design does not extend to the current version. By following our cohort out to 15 years postoperatively, we will evaluate whether the PFC Sigma TKR continues to represent a durable, effective option for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.…”

Diagnosis, Causes and Treatments of Instability Following Total Knee Arthroplasty

“…Total knee arthropalsty (TKA) has demonstrated superior efficacy in terms of pain relief and functional improvement, and the 10-year survival rates of the surgical procedure have been reported to be ≥90%1,2). In the meantime, however, revision procedures have been performed with increasing frequency.…”

Tibial tray fracture in a modern prosthesis with retrieval analysis

“…At an average follow-up of 7.2 years, there were 40 failures in the series: 17 from infection, 6 from wear/osteolysis, and 4 each for pain, instability, and component loosening [18] . There were no reported tibial tray fractures in this series or other follow-up studies for this implant [18] , [19] , [20] . In other cases with earlier generations of implants, design has thought to be a contributing factor to fracture.…”