Roman Ciprian OLİVİU, Zazgyva ANCUTA, Sâmpalean SEPTİMİU, Nagy ÖRS, Pop Tudor SORİN

Mid-term results of total knee replacement with single-radius versus multi-radius posterior-stabilized implants

Objective: Single-radius femoral total knee endoprosthesis designs were introduced with the promise of better clinical and functional results by means of superior biomechanical characteristics. The aim of this study was to compare the mid-term clinical, functional, radiologic, and survivorship outcomes of 2 types of posterior-stabilized knee replacement systems: the single-radius Scorpio® (Stryker®, Mahwah, NJ, USA) and the multi-radius NexGen® (Zimmer®, Warsaw, IN, USA).Methods: This retrospective observational study included 139 patients (164 knees) that underwent total knee replacement (TKR) between October 2004 and December 2010: 94 knees (75 patients) with Scorpio® and 70 knees (64 patients) with NexGen®. The 2 patient groups were similar in terms of age, gender ratio, diagnosis, disease stage, and knee joint alignment. Mean follow-up times were 35 (range: 12-112) months and 32 (range: 13-75) months, respectively. Evaluation was based on the Knee Society scores (KSS) and the Knee Society Total Knee Arthroplasty Roentgenographic Evaluation and Scoring System, with survival data compiled using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.Results: Clinical and functional improvements were recorded in all cases, with no statistically significant differences between the 2 patient groups. Survivorship was 95.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91.8-99.8%) for the multi-radius implant at 60 months and 92.7% (95% CI: 87.7-97.7%) for the single-radius implant at 84 months, with no significant difference (p=0.31).Conclusion: This study demonstrates that both single-radius and multi-radius posterior-stabilized knee endoprostheses can significantly reduce pain and improve knee joint function in patients if used with a proper technique, with the additional benefit of good mid-term survivorship

___

Michael JW, Schlüter-Brust KU, Eysel P. The epidemiol- ogy, etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2010;107:152-62.
Oliveria SA, Felson DT, Reed JI, Cirillo PA, Walker AM. Incidence of symptomatic hand, hip, and knee osteoarthri- tis among patients in a health maintenance organization. Arthritis Rheum 1995;38:1134-41.
Bijlsma JW, Berenbaum F, Lafeber FP. Osteoarthri- tis: an update with relevance for clinical practice. Lancet 2011;377:2115-26.
Kaçar C, Gilgil E, Urhan S, Arikan V, Dündar U, Oksüz MC, et al. The prevalence of symptomatic knee and distal interphalangeal joint osteoarthritis in the urban popula- tion of Antalya, Turkey. Rheumatol Int 2005;25:201-4.
van Baar ME, Dekker J, Lemmens JA, Oostendorp RA, Bijlsma JW. Pain and disability in patients with osteoar- thritis of hip or knee: the relationship with articular, ki- nesiological, and psychological characteristics. J Rheumatol 1998;25:125-33.
Ebrahimzadeh MH, Makhmalbaf H, Birjandinejad A, Soltani-Moghaddas SH. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the persian version of the oxford knee score in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Iran J Med Sci 2014;39:529-35.
Naal FD, Impellizzeri FM, Sieverding M, Loibl M, von Knoch F, Mannion AF, et al. The 12-item Oxford Knee Score: cross-cultural adaptation into German and assess- ment of its psychometric properties in patients with osteo- arthritis of the knee. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009;17:49- 52.
Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replace- ment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998;80:63-9.
Garratt AM, Brealey S, Gillespie WJ; DAMASK Trial Team. Patient-assessed health instruments for the knee: a structured review. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2004;43:1414- 23.
Takeuchi R, Sawaguchi T, Nakamura N, Ishikawa H, Saito T, Goldhahn S. Cross-cultural adaptation and vali- dation of the Oxford 12-item knee score in Japanese. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011;131:247-54.
Raman R, Dutta A, Day N, Sharma HK, Shaw CJ, John- son GV. Efficacy of Hylan G-F 20 and Sodium Hyaluro- nate in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee -- a pro- spective randomized clinical trial. Knee 2008;15:318-24.
Clarke S, Lock V, Duddy J, Sharif M, Newman JH, Kirwan JR. Intra-articular hylan G-F 20 (Synvisc) in the manage- ment of patellofemoral osteoarthritis of the knee (POAK). Knee 2005;12:57-62.
Khurana D, Sankhala SS, Malik M, Shekhawat V, Rathore DS. Comparative study of high tibial osteotomy using dynamic axial fixator and locked low-profile plate in me- dial osteoarthritis of knee. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2015;25:763-73.
Weil YA, Gardner MJ, Boraiah S, Helfet DL, Lorich DG. Posteromedial supine approach for reduction and fixation of medial and bicondylar tibial plateau fractures. J Orthop Trauma 2008;22:357-62.
Harris KK, Dawson J, Jones LD, Beard DJ, Price AJ. Ex- tending the use of PROMs in the NHS--using the Oxford Knee Score in patients undergoing non-operative manage- ment for knee osteoarthritis: a validation study. BMJ Open 2013;3:e003365.
Dunbar MJ, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L. Translation and validation of the Oxford-12 item knee score for use in Sweden. Acta Orthop Scand 2000;71:268-74.
Padua R, Zanoli G, Ceccarelli E, Romanini E, Bondì R, Campi A. The Italian version of the Oxford 12-item Knee Questionnaire-cross-cultural adaptation and validation. Int Orthop 2003;27:214-6.
Charoencholvanich K, Pongcharoen B. Oxford knee score and SF-36: translation & reliability for use with total knee arthroscopy patients in Thailand. J Med Assoc Thai 2005;88:1194-202.
Haverkamp D, Breugem SJ, Sierevelt IN, Blankevoort L, van Dijk CN. Translation and validation of the Dutch ver- sion of the Oxford 12-item knee questionnaire for knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 2005;76:347-52.
Xie F, Li SC, Lo NN, Yeo SJ, Yang KY, Yeo W, et al. Cross- cultural adaptation and validation of Singapore English and Chinese Versions of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in knee osteoarthritis patients undergoing total knee replace- ment. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2007;15:1019-24.
Jenny JY, Diesinger Y. Validation of a French version of the Oxford knee questionnaire. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2011;97:267-71.
Gonçalves RS, Tomás AM, Martins DI. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Portuguese version of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Knee 2012;19:344-7.
Eun IS, Kim OG, Kim CK, Lee HS, Lee JS. Validation of the Korean version of the Oxford Knee Score in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013;471:600-5.
Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D, Bole G, Borenstein D, Brandt K, et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Commit- tee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis Rheum 1986;29:1039-49.
Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of os- teo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis 1957;16:494-502.
Tüzün EH, Eker L, Aytar A, Daşkapan A, Bayramoğlu M. Acceptability, reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Turkish version of WOMAC osteoarthritis index. Osteo- arthritis Cartilage 2005;13:28-33.
Koçyiğit H, Aydemir Ö, Ölmez N, Memiş A. Kısa Form 36 (KF-36)'nın Türkçe versiyonunun güvenilirliği ve geçerliliği. İlaç ve Tedavi Dergisi 1999;12:102-6.
Murray DW, Fitzpatrick R, Rogers K, Pandit H, Beard DJ, Carr AJ, et al. The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007;89:1010-4.
Tuğay U, Tuğay N, Gelecek N, Özkan M. Oxford Shoulder Score: cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Turk- ish version. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011;131:687-94.
Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short- form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473-83.
Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, et al. Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Pa- tient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adapta- tion. Value Health 2005;8:94-104.
Acquadro C, Conway K, Hareendran A, Aaronson N; Eu- ropean Regulatory Issues and Quality of Life Assessment (ERIQA) Group. Literature review of methods to translate health-related quality of life questionnaires for use in mul- tinational clinical trials. Value Health 2008;11:509-21.
Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: lit- erature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 1993;46:1417-32.
Sidani S, Guruge S, Miranda J, Ford-Gilboe M, Varcoe C. Cultural adaptation and translation of measures: an inte- grated method. Res Nurs Health 2010;33:133-43.
Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. CRC Press 1997.
Polgar S, Thomas SA. Introduction to research in the health sciences. Elsevier Health Sciences 2013.
Roddey TS, Olson SL, Cook KF, Gartsman GM, Hanten W. Comparison of the University of California-Los Ange- les Shoulder Scale and the Simple Shoulder Test with the shoulder pain and disability index: single-administration reliability and validity. Phys Ther 2000;80:759-68.
Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status question- naires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:34-42.
Hicks C. Practical research methods for physiotherapists. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1988.
Wikipedia. Turks in Europe [cited 2015]. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turks_in_Europe.
Ekeberg OM, Bautz-Holter E, Tveitå EK, Keller A, Juel NG, Brox JI. Agreement, reliability and validity in 3 shoul- der questionnaires in patients with rotator cuff disease. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2008;9:68.