Whether ultra-congruent (UC) or posterior cruciate ligament-stabilized (PS) inserts should be used in posterior cruciate ligament (PCL)-sacrificing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains debatable. Therefore, the aim of this prospective randomized controlled study was to compare the isokinetic performance and clinical outcomes of these inserts in PCL-sacrificing TKA.
Sixty-six patients diagnosed with primary knee osteoarthritis were randomly assigned to either the UC or the PS group. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of age, body mass index or sex. The Knee Society score (KSS) and isokinetic performance results for each patient were recorded preoperatively and at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The physiatrist that performed the isokinetic tests and the patients were blinded to the study groups.
There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of the preoperative KSS or isokinetic performance. Gradual improvement in the KSS was observed in both groups, but no significant differences were detected between the groups during the whole follow-up period. The UC and PS groups exhibited similar peak extension and flexion torque values normalized to body weight at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively (p > 0.05).
The use of UC or PS inserts in TKA did not affect the clinical outcomes or isokinetic performance.The clinical relevance of this study is that the potential differences in clinical outcomes and isokinetic performance between UC and PS inserts do not need to be considered when sacrificing the PCL in TKA.
Level of evidence
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Akkawi I, Colle F, Bruni D, Raspugli GF, Bignozzi S, Zaffagnini S et al (2015) Deep-dished highly congruent tibial insert in CR-TKA does not prevent patellar tendon angle increase and patellar anterior translation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:1622–1630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-2889-5
Appy Fedida B, Krief E, Havet E, Massin P, Mertl P (2015) Cruciate-sacrificing total knee arthroplasty and insert design: a radiologic study of sagittal laxity. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2015.07.024
Bae JH, Yoon JR, Sung JH, Shin YS (2018) Posterior-stabilized inserts are preferable to cruciate-substituting ultracongruent inserts due to more favourable kinematics and stability. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26:3300–3310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-4872-z
Bercik MJ, Joshi A, Parvizi J (2013) Posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 28:439–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2012.08.008
Daniilidis K, Skwara A, Vieth V, Fuchs-Winkelmann S, Heindel W, Stückmann V et al (2012) Highly conforming polyethylene inlays reduce the in vivo variability of knee joint kinematics after total knee arthroplasty. Knee 19:260–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2011.04.001
Emerson RH Jr, Barrington JW, Olugbode SA, Alnachoukati OK (2016) A comparison of 2 tibial inserts of different constraint for cruciate-retaining primary total knee arthroplasty: an additional tool for balancing the posterior cruciate ligament. J Arthroplasty 31:425–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2015.09.032
Fritzsche H, Beyer F, Postler A, Lützner J (2018) Different intraoperative kinematics, stability, and range of motion between cruciate-substituting ultracongruent and posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26:1465–1470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4427-8
Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN (1989) Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 13–14
Jang SW, Kim MS, Koh IJ, Sohn S, Kim C, In Y (2019) Comparison of anterior-stabilized and posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty in the same patients: a prospective randomized study. J Arthroplasty 34:1682–1689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.03.062
Kim JG, Lee SW, Ha JK, Choi HJ, Yang SJ, Lee MY (2011) The effectiveness of minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty to preserve quadriceps strength: a randomized controlled trial. Knee 18:443–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2010.08.008
Kim TW, Lee SM, Seong SC, Lee S, Jang J, Lee MC (2016) Different intraoperative kinematics with comparable clinical outcomes of ultracongruent and posterior stabilized mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24:3036–3043. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3489-0
Lacko M, Schreierová D (2019) Comparison of survival rate and risk of revision for mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee replacements. Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi 30:70–78. https://doi.org/10.5606/ehc.2019.62830
Lee SS, Kim JH, Heo JW, Moon YW (2019) Gradual change in knee extension following total knee arthroplasty using ultracongruent inserts. Knee 26:905–913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2019.06.001
Li N, Tan Y, Deng Y, Chen L (2014) Posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:556–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2275-0
Lienhard K, Lauermann SP, Schneider D, Item-Glatthorn JF, Casartelli NC, Maffiuletti NA (2013) Validity and reliability of isometric, isokinetic and isoinertial modalities for the assessment of quadriceps muscle strength in patients with total knee arthroplasty. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 23:1283–1288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2013.09.004
Lützner J, Beyer F, Dexel J, Fritzsche H, Lützner C, Kirschner S (2017) No difference in range of motion between ultracongruent and posterior stabilized design in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:3515–3521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4331-7
Lützner J, Firmbach FP, Lützner C, Dexel J, Kirschner S (2015) Similar stability and range of motion between cruciate-retaining and cruciate-substituting ultracongruent insert total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:1638–1643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-2892-x
Maffiuletti NA, Bizzini M, Widler K, Munzinger U (2010) Asymmetry in quadriceps rate of force development as a functional outcome measure in TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:191–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-0978-4
Matziolis G, Mehlhorn S, Schattat N, Diederichs G, Hube R, Perka C et al (2012) How much of the PCL is really preserved during the tibial cut? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20:1083–1086. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1696-5
Nguyen LC, Lehil MS, Bozic KJ (2015) Trends in total knee arthroplasty implant utilization. J Arthroplasty 30:739–742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2014.12.009
Omori G, Onda N, Shimura M, Hayashi T, Sato T, Koga Y (2009) The effect of geometry of the tibial polyethylene insert on the tibiofemoral contact kinematics in advance medial pivot total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci 14:754–760. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-009-1402-3
Peters CL, Mulkey P, Erickson J, Anderson MB, Pelt CE (2014) Comparison of total knee arthroplasty with highly congruent anterior-stabilized bearings versus a cruciate-retaining design. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472:175–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-3068-6
Scott DF (2018) Prospective randomized comparison of posterior-stabilized versus condylar-stabilized total knee arthroplasty: final report of a five-year study. J Arthroplasty 33:1384–1388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.11.037
Sole G, Hamrén J, Milosavljevic S, Nicholson H, Sullivan SJ (2007) Test-retest reliability of isokinetic knee extension and flexion. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 88:626–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2007.02.006
Song EK, Lim HA, Joo SD, Kim SK, Lee KB, Seon JK (2017) Total knee arthroplasty using ultra-congruent inserts can provide similar stability and function compared with cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:3530–3535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4553-3
Sur YJ, Koh IJ, Park SW, Kim HJ, In Y (2015) Condylar-stabilizing tibial inserts do not restore anteroposterior stability after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 30:587–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2014.11.018
Wang XF, Ma ZH, Teng XR (2020) Isokinetic strength test of muscle strength and motor function in total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Surg 12:878–889. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.12699
Yoon JR, Yang JH (2018) Satisfactory short-term results of navigation-assisted gap-balancing total knee arthroplasty using ultracongruent insert. J Arthroplasty 33:723–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.09.049
The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This study was approved by the institutional review board (IRB) by the “Ankara Numune Training and Research Hospital Clinical Research Ethics Committee” ethical committee (1585/2017) and was performed in accordance to the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its amendments.
Written informed consent was acquired for all participants prior to their participation.
Trial registration number and date of registration
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04419311, 05 June 2020 (Retrospectively registered).
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Akti, S., Karakus, D., Sezgin, E.A. et al. No differences in clinical outcomes or isokinetic performance between cruciate-substituting ultra-congruent and posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasties: a randomized controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06275-z
- Total knee replacement
- Posterior stabilized