Patients achieved greater range of movement when using high-flexion implants
- 611 Downloads
NexGen Legacy Posterior Stabilized high-flexion prostheses (LPS-Flex) have been popularized as an alternative to NexGen standard prostheses (LPS) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Advocates of this new generation prosthesis suggest improved postoperative knee flexion. The purpose of this study was to summarize the best evidence for comparing the range of motion (ROM) and functional outcomes of LPS-Flex prostheses and LPS in TKA.
Electronic databases were systematically searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The last date for our research was July 2014. Our search strategy was followed the requirements of the Cochrane Library Handbook. The methodological quality was assessed, and the data were extracted independently by two authors.
Nine studies that included 978 knees met our inclusion criteria for review. The results showed that there was larger postoperative ROM (1.62, 95 % CI 0.52–2.72) in the LPS-Flex group than in the LPS group. There was not a statistically significant difference in the clinical functional scores and complications between the LPS-Flex group and the LPS group in TKA. The pooled mean differences were as follows: total KSS, −0.64 (95 % CI −1.41 to 0.13); functional KSS, −0.53 (95 % CI −1.51 to 0.45); HSS, 0.23 (95 % CI −0.87 to 1.33); complications, 0.49 (95 % CI 0.20–1.24); and radiolucent lines, 1.56 (95 % CI 0.68–3.55).
The preliminary results indicate that the NexGen LPS-Flex prosthesis provides an alternative to the NexGen LPS prosthesis, with greater range of motion and without severe complications or radiographic outcomes. The clinical advantages were not shown in the KSS or the HSS. Thus, the selection of a high-flexion prosthesis should depend on the characteristics of the patient, particularly high motivation and poor preoperative ROM. The potential benefits in the medium- and long-term outcomes require confirmation by larger, multicenter and well-conducted RCTs.
Level of evidence
Therapeutic study, Level I.
KeywordsHigh-flexion prosthesis Standard prosthesis Range of motion Total knee arthroplasty
This research was funded by the China Health Ministry Program (201302007). No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.
- 8.Endres S (2011) High-flexion versus conventional total knee arthroplasty: a 5-year study. J Orthop Surg 19:226–229Google Scholar
- 25.Lingard EA, Katz JN, Wright RJ, Wright EA, Sledge CB (2001) Validity and responsiveness of the Knee Society Clinical Rating System in comparison with the SF-36 and WOMAC. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83-a:1856-1864Google Scholar
- 30.Nam SW, Lee YS, Kwak JH, Kim NK, Lee BK (2012) A Comparison of the Clinical and Radiographic Results of Press Fit Condylar Rotating-Platform High-Flexion and Low Contact Stress Mobile Bearing Prosthesis in Total Knee Arthroplasty: short term Results. Knee Surg Relat Res 24:7–13CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 31.Nieuwenhuijse MJ, van der Voort P, Kaptein BL, Van der Linden-van der Zwaag HM, Valstar ER, Nelissen RG (2013) Fixation of high-flexion total knee prostheses: five-year follow-up results of a four-arm randomized controlled clinical and roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95:e1411-11CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 35.Report on the Ontario Joint Replacement Registry (2006) Edited (Toronto, Ontario, Canada)Google Scholar
- 40.Singh H, Mittal V, Nadkarni B, Agarwal S, Gulati D (2012) Gender-specific high-flexion knee prosthesis in Indian women: a prospective randomised study. J Orthop Surg 20:153–156Google Scholar