Functional versus patient-reported outcome of the bicruciate and the standard condylar-stabilizing total knee arthroplasty
The purpose of this retrospective comparative analysis in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was to evaluate whether different TKA implant design would influence patient-rated outcomes, functioning, and range of motion (ROM). A secondary purpose of this study was to test for relationships between the patient-rated outcomes and the passive ROM.
Materials and methods
Thirty-one patients who had a primary bicruciate stabilized TKA performed between May 2010 and November 2012 were retrospectively reviewed and compared with a cohort of 30 patients who had condylar-stabilizing TKA during the same period.
No significant differences were observed between the two groups with respect to preoperative demographic characteristics, ROM and radiographic knee alignment. At a mean follow-up of 37 months (SD 7), the Triathlon group had higher mean Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) score in all subscales and a higher Knee Society Score (KSS) score than the Journey group. This difference was statistically significant for the KOOS subscales of pain (p = 0.0099) and activities of daily living (ADL) (p = 0.0003), as well as the KSS score (p = 0.03846). The ROM was significantly higher in the Journey group when compared to the Triathlon group (p = 0.0013). No significant correlation was observed between the ROM and KOOS pain, QOL and ADL subscores and KSS score.
Postoperative knee ROM and patient perception of knee function after primary TKA can be affected by the different prosthetic designs. However, functionality afforded by the bicruciate TKA is not equivalent to patient satisfaction.
Level of evidence
KeywordsTotal knee arthroplasty Prosthetic design KOOS Score KSS score Clinical outcome Range of movement
The authors are grateful to Mara Buoro, Lina Fiorin, and Valeria Martin of the Oderzo Hospital Orthopaedic and Traumatology Department for their valuable assistance during follow-up and data management.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
- 15.Monticone M, Ferrante S, Salvaderi S, Rocca B, Totti V, Foti C, Roi GS (2012) Development of the Italian version of the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score for patients with knee injuries: cross-cultural adaptation, dimensionality, reliability, and validity. Osteoarthr Cartilage 20:330–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Brosseau L, Tousignant M, Budd J, Chartier N, Duciaume L, Plamondon S, O’Sullivan JP, O’Donoghue S, Balmer S (1997) Intratester and intertester reliability and criterion validity of the parallelogram and universal goniometers for active knee flexion in healthy subjects. Physiother Res Int 2:150–166CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Evans JD (1996) Straightforward statistics for the behavioral sciences. Brooks/Cole Publishing, Pacific GroveGoogle Scholar