Comparison of Revision Rates of Non-modular Constrained Versus Posterior Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty: a Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study
Attaining stability during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is essential for a successful outcome. Although traditional constrained total knee prostheses have generally been used in conjunction with intramedullary stems, some devices have been widely used without the use of stems, referred to as non-modular constrained condylar total knee arthroplasty (NMCCK).
The aim of this study was to compare revisions rates after total knee replacement with a non-modular constrained condylar total knee (NMCCK) compared to a posterior-stabilized (PS) design.
Between 2007 and 2012, primary PS total knees were compared with NMCCK implants from the same manufacturer. Propensity score matching was performed, and implant survivorship was examined using a Cox proportional hazards model. The cohort consisted of 817 PS knees and 817 NMCCKs matched for patient demographics, surgeon volume, and pre-operative diagnosis.
All cause revisions occurred in 11 of 817 (1.35%) in the PS group compared to 28 of 817 (3.43%) in the NMCCK group (p = 0.0168). Excluding revisions for infection and fracture, 8 of 817 (0.98%) PS knees required revision for mechanical failure compared to 18 of 817 (2.20%) NMCCK knees (p = 0.0193).
While revisions rates in both cohorts were low, there was a significantly higher revision rate with NMCCKs. Given that cases requiring the use of NMCCK implants are likely more complex than those in which PS implants are used, our findings support the judicious use of NMCCK prostheses.
Keywordstotal knee arthroplasty revision total knee arthroplasty constrained total knee arthroplasty posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty
- 4.Buechel FF. A sequential three-step lateral release for correcting fixed valgus knee deformities during total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990; 260: 170-5.Google Scholar
- 7.Krackow KA, Jones MM, Teeny SM, Hungerford DS. Primary total knee arthroplasty in patients with fixed valgus deformity. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991; 273: 9-18.Google Scholar
- 13.Rosenbaum P, Rubin D. Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. Am Stat. 1985; 39(1): 33-38.Google Scholar
- 16.Whiteside LA. Correction of ligament and bone defects in total arthroplasty of the severely valgus knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993; 288: 234-45.Google Scholar