Comparison Of Outcomes After Knee Arthroplasty Using Posterior-Substituting Versus Cruciate-Retaining Prostheses
Comparison Of Outcomes After Bilateral Simultaneous Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Posterior-Substituting Versus Cruciate-Retaining Prostheses
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Total knee arthroplasty is used to treat patients with osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and other knee disorders. Today, there are basically two primary designs; posterior cruciate Substituting (PS) and protects the posterior cruciate -Retaining (CR). However, it is still controversial which approach is good, as both CR and PS have advantages and disadvantages. Proponents of the posterior cruciate retaining system argue that it provides natural stability, wider joint range of motion, better proprioception, and better knee kinematics. In addition, proponents of the posterior cruciate substituting system argue that it provides more harmonious articulation and a wider flexion range.
As a result, although there is no clear study suggesting which design is better, research on this subject has increased recently. Our aim is to define the superiority of these two designs over each other.
Patients with the same stage of knee osteoarthritis in both knees were selected. Total knee arthroplasty was performed in the same session by making the appropriate design for the appropriate knee simultaneously. Preoperative and postoperative joint range of motion examinations were performed on both knees separately. WOMAC and OXFORD scores were examined separately for both knees.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Fatih
-
Istanbul, Fatih, Turkey, 34093
- Bezmialem Vakıf University
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Child
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients with primary osteoarthritis of both knees
- Patients with secondary osteoarthritis of both knees
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients with primary osteoarthritis in both knees and undergoing unilateral knee prosthesis
- Patients with secondary osteoarthritis in both knees and who underwent unilateral knee prosthesis
- Patients with primary osteoarthritis in both knees and who underwent bilateral knee prosthesis in different sessions
- Patients with secondary osteoarthritis in both knees and who underwent bilateral knee prosthetics in different sessions.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Non-Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Active Comparator: A knee of a patient with osteoarthritis of both knees
Posterior cruciate ligament protective approach in patients with knee osteoarthritis
|
Posterior cruciate ligament protective approach in patients with knee osteoarthritis
|
|
Active Comparator: The other knee of a patient with osteoarthritis in both knees
Posterior cruciate ligament transection approach in patients with knee osteoarthritis
|
Posterior cruciate ligament transection approach in patients with knee osteoarthritis
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Range of motions
Time Frame: 3 year
|
Preoperative and postoperative knee flexion and extension degrees of the patients were measured.
|
3 year
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
WOMAC Score (Score from 0 to 100)
Time Frame: 3 year
|
Preoperative and postoperative WOMAC score of the patients were examined.
|
3 year
|
|
OXFORD Knee Score(Score from 0 to 60)
Time Frame: 3 year
|
Preoperative and postoperative OXFORD score of the patients were examined.
|
3 year
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Chalidis BE, Sachinis NP, Papadopoulos P, Petsatodis E, Christodoulou AG, Petsatodis G. Long-term results of posterior-cruciate-retaining Genesis I total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci. 2011 Nov;16(6):726-31. doi: 10.1007/s00776-011-0152-1. Epub 2011 Sep 10.
- Li N, Tan Y, Deng Y, Chen L. Posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014 Mar;22(3):556-64. doi: 10.1007/s00167-012-2275-0. Epub 2012 Nov 3.
- Rossi R, Bruzzone M, Bonasia DE, Marmotti A, Castoldi F. Evaluation of tibial rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a cadaver study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2010 Jul;18(7):889-93. doi: 10.1007/s00167-009-1023-6. Epub 2010 Jan 8.
- Insall JN, Lachiewicz PF, Burstein AH. The posterior stabilized condylar prosthesis: a modification of the total condylar design. Two to four-year clinical experience. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982 Dec;64(9):1317-23. No abstract available.
- In Y, Kim JM, Woo YK, Choi NY, Sohn JM, Koh HS. Factors affecting flexion gap tightness in cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2009 Feb;24(2):317-21. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.10.022. Epub 2008 Oct 25.
- Kim YH, Choi Y, Kwon OR, Kim JS. Functional outcome and range of motion of high-flexion posterior cruciate-retaining and high-flexion posterior cruciate-substituting total knee prostheses. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Apr;91(4):753-60. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00805.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimated)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- IRB00013890
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.