Knee Arthroplasty With a Medially Conforming Ball-and-Socket Tibiofemoral Articulation Provides Better Function

Hossain, Fahad S; Patel, Shelain; Rhee, Shin-Jae; Haddad, Fares S.

doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1493-3

Cited by 67 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The change from baseline in the mean OKS was 16.2 points at 12 months and 16.8 points at two years indicating no minimally important improvement during the second post-operative year. The third study reported OKS data at 12 months and two years after surgery for patients receiving two different types of ball and socket design [19]. The mean OKS was 12.2 points higher after 12 months and 12.6 points higher after two years for the first group.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The risk of interviewer bias was considered low in five of the hip replacement studies [6,8-11] and six of the knee replacement studies as there was clear evidence that patients completed their questionnaires without the risk of interference from a member of the research team or local hospital staff. In one of the hip replacement studies [12] and three of the knee replacement studies [14,17,19] it was unclear if this was true.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What is the optimal time point to assess patient-reported recovery after hip and knee replacement? a systematic review and analysis of routinely reported outcome data from the English patient-reported outcome measures programme

Browne

Bastaki

Dawson

2013

Health Qual Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIt is unclear if there is a clinically important improvement in the six to 12-month recovery period after hip and knee replacement. This is an obvious gap in the evidence required by patients undergoing these procedures. It is also an issue for the English PROMs (Patient-Reported Outcome Measures) Programme which uses 6-month outcome data to compare the results of hospitals that perform hip and knee replacements.MethodsA systematic review of studies reporting the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) or Oxford Knee Score (OKS) at 12 months after surgery was performed. This was compared with six-month outcome data collected for 60, 160 patients within the English PROMs programme. A minimally important difference of one standard error of the measurement, equivalent to 2.7 for the OHS and 2.1 for the OKS, was adopted.Results and discussionSix studies reported OHS data for 10 different groups containing 8,308 patients in total. In eight groups the change scores reported were at least 2.7 points higher than the six-month change observed in the PROMs programme (20.2 points). Nine studies reported OKS data for 13 different groups containing 4,369 patients in total. In eight groups the change scores reported were at least 2.1 points higher than the six-month change observed in the PROMs programme (15.0 points).ConclusionsThere is some evidence from this systematic review that clinically important improvement in the Oxford hip and knee scores occurs in the six to 12 month recovery period. This trend is more apparent for hip than knee replacement. Therefore we recommend that the English Department of Health study the impact on hospital comparisons of using 12- rather than six-month outcome data.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the optimal time point to assess patient-reported recovery after hip and knee replacement? a systematic review and analysis of routinely reported outcome data from the English patient-reported outcome measures programme

Browne

Bastaki

Dawson

2013

Health Qual Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hossain et al [42] conducted a randomized controlled trial with a greater improvement in MP prosthesis mobility 1 and 2 years after surgery compared with PS prostheses. In the present study, group B performed superior to group A in terms of postoperative activity improvement, while the improvement in the Kujala score in group A was better than in group B; however, similar KSS and WOMAC scores were recorded in the two groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

WITHDRAWN: Early Patellofemoral Function of Unilateral TKA with Medial Pivot Prostheses is Superior than with Conventional Posterior-Stabilized Prostheses

Wang

Zhang

Ding

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to provide a systematic evaluation of the patellofemoral joint design of Medial Pivot Prosthesis, which incorporates a variety of “Patella-friendly” design features, by comparing clinical and radiographic results with another prosthesis. MethodsEarly clinical and radiographic results of patients who underwent unilateral TKA with Medial Pivot Prosthesis (The study group, including 126 cases) and conventional Posterior-Stabilized Prosthesis (The control group) were retrospectively compared. Postoperative complications, including anterior knee pain, maltracking, patellar clunk or crepitus (PCC), were evaluated.ResultsThe postoperative Kujala score and its improvement from baseline in the study group (Group A) were significantly higher than those in the control group(Group B). The range of motion (ROM) in group A, including the improvement in ROM, was significantly inferior to group B. In the 90-degree Merchant view, the patellar tilt in group A was smaller than that in group B. Two cases of PCC and 3 cases of anterior knee pain were noted in group A, and 9 cases and 6 cases, respectively, were observed in group B. The incidence of PCC was significantly lower in group A. There were no significant between-group differences in the patella tilt angle at 30 or 60° or in the postoperative patellar translation at 30, 60 or 90°. No between-group difference in posterior condyles angle (PCA) was observed. The KSS scores and WOMAC scores between the two groups were similar.ConclusionThe medial pivot prosthesis could achieve satisfactory outcomes with superior patellofemoral performance attributed to its “patella-friendly” design characteristics compared to the conventional posterior-stabilized prosthesis.

show abstract

“…They attributed the difference in ROM and outcomes to a variable engagement of the cam and post of the PS implant in comparison to the smooth relatively constrained medial compartment of the MR implant design. The authors concluded that the MR design better emulates the native knee modifi ed hinge joint with a medially based rotational axis, when compared to the PS design, potentially translating to more effi cient knee kinematics and the observed increased ROM [ 5 ]. A similar advantage to a CR design, an MR implant without a PS component eliminates the need to remove the native femoral bone for the box cut, thus preserving the bone.…”

Section: Medial Rotationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prosthetic Kinematics: Cruciate Retaining Versus Posterior Stabilized Versus Medial Pivot

Blevins

Cross

2015

Total Knee Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knee Arthroplasty With a Medially Conforming Ball-and-Socket Tibiofemoral Articulation Provides Better Function

Abstract: Level I, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Cited by 67 publications

References 34 publications

What is the optimal time point to assess patient-reported recovery after hip and knee replacement? a systematic review and analysis of routinely reported outcome data from the English patient-reported outcome measures programme

What is the optimal time point to assess patient-reported recovery after hip and knee replacement? a systematic review and analysis of routinely reported outcome data from the English patient-reported outcome measures programme

WITHDRAWN: Early Patellofemoral Function of Unilateral TKA with Medial Pivot Prostheses is Superior than with Conventional Posterior-Stabilized Prostheses

Prosthetic Kinematics: Cruciate Retaining Versus Posterior Stabilized Versus Medial Pivot

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About