HSS Journal

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 120–124 | Cite as

Average 7-Year Survivorship and Clinical Results of a Newer Primary Posterior Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty

  • Jessica Ehrhardt
  • Naomi Gadinsky
  • Stephen Lyman
  • Daniel Markowicz
  • Geoffrey Westrich
Original Article

Abstract

We evaluated the average 7-year survivorship and clinical results of a newer primary posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The modifications in this design included a deeper patellar sulcus aimed at reducing contact stresses, improving patellar tracking, and achieving greater maximum flexion. A consecutive group of 137 patients (171 knees) who underwent TKAs using the Optetrak PS knee prosthesis between October 1997 and March 2004 were followed for an average of 6.8 years (range 4.0–11.5 years). Preoperative range of motion (ROM) and Knee Society scores were obtained and compared to that of the patients’ most recent follow-up. Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) and revision of the implant for any reason were considered endpoints for Kaplan–Meier survival analysis of all knees. Twenty-one knees (12.3%) underwent MUA. Three knees (1.8%) underwent revision, resulting in a 97.2% survival at a mean 10 years follow-up. Pain scores and ROM significantly improved after surgery (from preoperative average of 5.3 and 105° respectively to 44.6 and 120° postoperatively). These findings suggest that this posterior stabilized knee design is both a safe and effective option for patients undergoing primary TKA.

Keywords

total knee arthroplasty survivorship outcomes 

References

  1. 1.
    Aglietti P, Buzzi R. Posteriorly stabilized total-condylar knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg (B). 1988; 70: 211–216Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bartel DL, Rawlinson JJ, Burnstein AH, et al. Stresses in polyethylene components of contemporary total knee replacements. Clin Orthop. 1995; 317: 76PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Callaghan J, O’Rourke M, Goetz D, et al. Tibial post impingement in posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop. 2002; 404: 83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Indelli P, Aglietti P, Buzzi R, Baldini A. The Insall–Burstein II prosthesis: A 5- to 9-year follow-up study in osteoarthritic knees. J Arthroplasty. 2002; 17: 544–549PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Insall J, Lachiewicz P, Burstein A. The posterior stabilized condylar prosthesis: A modification of the total condylar design. J Bone Joint Surg (Am). 1982; 64: 1317–1323Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Katz MM, Hungerford DS, Krackow KA, Lennox DW. Results of total knee arthroplasty after failed proximal tibial osteotomy for osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1987;69:225–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Larson C, Lachiewicz P. Patellofemoral complications with the Insall–Burstein II posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1999; 14: 288–292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Puloski S, McCalden R, MacDonald S, et al. Tibial post wear in posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: An unrecognized source of polyethylene debris. J Bone Joint Surg (Am). 2001; 83: 390Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ritter M, Berend M, Meding J, et al. Long-term followup of anatomic graduated components posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacement. Clin Orthop. 2001; 388: 51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Robinson R. Five-year follow-up of primary Optetrak Posterior Stabilized total knee arthroplasties in osteoarthritis. J Arthroplasty. 2005; 20: 927–931PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Robinson R. The early innovators of today’s resurfacing condylar knees. J Arthroplasty. 2005; 20(Supplement): 2–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scott RD. Stiffness associated with total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2009; 32(9):682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Scuderi G, Clarke H. Cemented posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2004; 19(No 4 Suppl 1):17–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sharkey P, Hozack W, Rothman R, et al. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Section I Symposium of the Knee Society Meeting, Philadelphia, PA; 2002Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stern S, Insall J. Posterior stabilized prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg (Am). 1992; 74: 980–986Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stiehl JB, Voorhorst PE, Keblish P, Sorrells RB. Comparison of range of motion after posterior cruciate ligament retention or sacrifice with a mobile bearing total knee arthroplasty. Am J Knee Surg 1997;10:216–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Hospital for Special Surgery 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jessica Ehrhardt
    • 1
  • Naomi Gadinsky
    • 1
  • Stephen Lyman
    • 1
  • Daniel Markowicz
    • 1
  • Geoffrey Westrich
    • 1
  1. 1.Hospital for Special SurgeryNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations