A Comparison of the PCL-Retaining AGC and Posterior Stabilizing Legacy Prostheses for Total Knee Arthroplasty

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig 1

References

  1. 1.

    Lachiewicz PF, Soileau ES (2004) The rates of osteolysis and loosening associated with a modular posterior stabilized knee replacement. Results at five to fourteen years. J Bone Jt Surg Am 86-A(3):525–530

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Worland RL, Johnson GV, Alemparte J, Jessup DE, Keenan J, Norambuena N (2002) Ten to fourteen year survival and functional analysis of the AGC total knee replacement system. Knee. May 9(2):133–137. Erratum in: Knee. 2003 Sep 10(3):303. Johnson Gonzalo [corrected to Johnson Gonzalo Vazquez-Vela]

  3. 3.

    Emerson RH Jr, Higgins LL, Head WC (2000) The AGC total knee prosthesis at average 11 years. J Arthroplasty 15(4):Review

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Ritter MA, Berend ME, Meding JB, Keating EM, Faris PM, Crites BM (2001) Long-term followup of anatomic graduated components posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res (388):51–57

  5. 5.

    Alemparte J, Cabezas A, Azocar O, Hernandez R, Acevedo M (2003) Mid-term results of an AGC total knee arthroplasty system survival and function analysis: 2- to 8-year follow-up results. J Arthroplasty 18(4):420–425 Jun

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Kelly MA, Clarke HD (2002) Long-term results of posterior cruciate-substituting total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res (404):51–57 Nov

  7. 7.

    Becker MW, Insall JN, Faris PM (1991) Bilateral total knee arthroplasty. One cruciate retaining and one cruciate substituting. Clin Orthop Relat Res (271):122–124 Oct

  8. 8.

    Clark CR, Rorabeck CH, MacDonald S, MacDonald D, Swafford J, Cleland D (2001) Posterior-stabilized and cruciate-retaining total knee replacement: a randomized study. Clin Orthop Relat Res (392):208–212 Nov

  9. 9.

    Maruyama S, Yoshiya S, Matsui N, Kuroda R, Kurosaka M (2004) Functional comparison of posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 19(3):349–353 Apr

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Hirsch HS, Lotke PA, Morrison LD (1994) The posterior cruciate ligament in total knee surgery. Save, sacrifice, or substitute? Clin Orthop Relat Res (309):64–68 Dec

  11. 11.

    Conditt MA, Noble PC, Bertolusso R, Woody J, Parsley BS (2004) The PCL significantly affects the functional outcome of total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 19(7 Suppl 2):107–112

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Tanzer M, Smith K, Burnett S (2002) Posterior-stabilized versus cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty: balancing the gap. J Arthroplasty 17(7):813–819 Oct

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philip M. Faris MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Faris, P.M., Ritter, M.A., Aleto, T.J. et al. A Comparison of the PCL-Retaining AGC and Posterior Stabilizing Legacy Prostheses for Total Knee Arthroplasty. HSS Jrnl 2, 127–129 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11420-006-9002-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Total Knee Arthroplasty
  • Function Score
  • Posterior Cruciate Ligament
  • Total Knee Replacement
  • Radiographic Analysis