Advertisement

Fifteen-year survival of the Cedior™ total knee prosthesis

  • Roger ErivanEmail author
  • Edouard Fadlallah
  • Guillaume Villatte
  • Aurélien Mulliez
  • Stéphane Descamps
  • Stéphane Boisgard
Original Article • KNEE - ARTHROPLASTY
  • 73 Downloads

Abstract

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is an effective treatment for advanced osteoarthritis of the knee. No large and long-term follow-up study has been done about Cedior® prosthesis. The study hypothesis was that 15-year survival for the Cedior™ prosthesis is at least as good as rates reported for other models. A continuous retrospective single-center study included patients managed by Cedior™ TKA with at least 15-year follow-up. The main endpoint was prosthesis survival; secondary objectives were to identify factors for implant revision and to assess functional scores at 15 years. In the present series, 15-year all-cause survival for the Cedior® knee prosthesis was 93.03%; comparable to rates in the literature, posterior-stabilized implants showed higher revision rates. No other factors for revision emerged. These findings are comparable with those of the literature.

Keywords

Total knee arthroplasty Total knee replacement Survival Knee 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests

Supplementary material

590_2019_2491_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (148 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 147 kb)

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Shan L, Shan B, Suzuki A et al (2015) Intermediate and long-term quality of life after total knee replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:156–168.  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.M.00372 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clement ND, Jenkins PJ, Brenkel IJ, Walmsley P (2012) Predictors of mortality after total knee replacement: a ten-year survivorship analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 94:200–204.  https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.94B2.28114 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Argenson J-N, Boisgard S, Parratte S et al (2013) Survival analysis of total knee arthroplasty at a minimum 10 years’ follow-up: a multicenter French nationwide study including 846 cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res OTSR 99:385–390.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2013.03.014 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cross M, Lapsley H, Barcenilla A et al (2009) Patient expectations of hip and knee joint replacement surgery and postoperative health status. Patient 2:51–60.  https://doi.org/10.2165/01312067-200902010-00006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Williams DH, Greidanus NV, Masri BA et al (2012) Predictors of participation in sports after hip and knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 470:555–561.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-2198-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Neuprez A, Delcour J-P, Fatemi F et al (2016) Patients’ expectations impact their satisfaction following total hip or knee arthroplasty. PLoS ONE 11:e0167911.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167911 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boisgard S, Descamps S, Miazzolo N et al (2011) 95. cedior total knee prosthesis: 10-year outcome. Orthop Proc 93-B:507.  https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.93BSUPP_IV.0930507b CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ahlbäck S (1968) Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) Suppl 277:7–72Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ware J, Kosinski M, Keller SD (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 34:220–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gandek B, Ware JE, Aaronson NK et al (1998) Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1171–1178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nilsdotter A-K, Toksvig-Larsen S, Roos EM (2009) A 5 year prospective study of patient-relevant outcomes after total knee replacement. Osteoarthr Cartil 17:601–606.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2008.11.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ornetti P, Parratte S, Gossec L et al (2008) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the French version of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) in knee osteoarthritis patients. Osteoarthr Cartil 16:423–428.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2007.08.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A (1998) Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:63–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lequesne MG, Mery C, Samson M, Gerard P (1987) Indexes of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. Validation–value in comparison with other assessment tests. Scand J Rheumatol Suppl 65:85–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN (1989) Rationale of the knee society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop 248:13–14Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Devane PA, Horne JG, Martin K et al (1997) Three-dimensional polyethylene wear of a press-fit titanium prosthesis. Factors influencing generation of polyethylene debris. J Arthroplasty 12:256–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Charnley J (1972) The long-term results of low-friction arthroplasty of the hip performed as a primary intervention. J Bone Joint Surg Br 54:61–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Baldini A, Anderson JA, Zampetti P et al (2006) A new patellofemoral scoring system for total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 452:150–154.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000238847.34047.90 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ewald FC (1989) The knee society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop 248:9–12Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Marx RG (2003) Knee rating scales. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg 19:1103–1108.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2003.10.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nakamura S, Ito H, Nakamura K et al (2017) Long-term durability of ceramic tri-condylar knee implants: a minimum 15-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 32:1874–1879.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.01.016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    McCalden RW, Hart GP, MacDonald SJ et al (2017) Clinical results and survivorship of the GENESIS II total knee arthroplasty at a minimum of 15 years. J Arthroplasty 32:2161–2166.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.02.006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Karachalios T, Varitimidis S, Bargiotas K et al (2016) An 11- to 15-year clinical outcome study of the advance medial pivot total knee arthroplasty: pivot knee arthroplasty. Bone Jt J 98-B:1050–1055.  https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.98B8.36208 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Maniar RN, Singhi T, Maniar PR, Kumar V (2017) 10- to 13-year results of mobile bearing posterior-stabilized rotating-platform knee implants, reported by nondesigner surgeon. J Arthroplasty 32:830–835.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.09.001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bistolfi A, Massazza G, Rosso F et al (2011) Cemented fixed-bearing PFC total knee arthroplasty: survival and failure analysis at 12–17 years. J Orthop Traumatol 12:131–136.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-011-0142-2 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Parratte S, Pagnano MW, Trousdale RT, Berry DJ (2010) Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on the fifteen-year survival of modern, cemented total knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:2143–2149.  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.I.01398 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Metsovitis SR, Ploumis AL, Chantzidis PT et al (2011) Rotaglide total knee arthroplasty: a long-term follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:878–884.  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.I.01702 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    de Vries L, van der Weegen W, Neve WC et al (2016) The effectiveness of debridement, antibiotics and irrigation for periprosthetic joint infections after primary hip and knee arthroplasty. A 15 years retrospective study in two community hospitals in the Netherlands. J Bone Jt Infect 1:20–24.  https://doi.org/10.7150/jbji.14075 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Koh CK, Zeng I, Ravi S et al (2017) Periprosthetic joint infection is the main cause of failure for modern knee arthroplasty: an analysis of 11,134 knees. Clin Orthop.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-017-5396-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chana R, Shenava Y, Nicholl AP et al (2008) Five- to 8-year results of the uncemented Duracon total knee arthroplasty system. J Arthroplasty 23:677–682.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2007.06.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Meding JB, Meding LK, Ritter MA, Keating EM (2012) Pain relief and functional improvement remain 20 years after knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 470:144–149.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-2123-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vertullo CJ, Lewis PL, Graves S et al (2017) Twelve-year outcomes of an oxinium total knee replacement compared with the same cobalt-chromium design: an analysis of 17,577 prostheses from the australian orthopaedic association national joint replacement registry. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99:275–283.  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.16.00092 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rat A-C, Guillemin F, Osnowycz G et al (2010) Total hip or knee replacement for osteoarthritis: mid- and long-term quality of life. Arthritis Care Res 62:54–62.  https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.20014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CNRS, SIGMA Clermont, ICCF, CHU Clermont-FerrandUniversité Clermont AuvergneClermont-FerrandFrance
  2. 2.CHU Clermont-FerrandUniversité Clermont AuvergneClermont-FerrandFrance
  3. 3.CHU Clermont-FerrandDélégation à la Recherche Clinique et aux Innovations (DRCI)Clermont-FerrandFrance

Personalised recommendations