Increased long-term survival of posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements

Matthew Abdel, Mark E. Morrey, Matthew R. Jensen, Bernard F. Morrey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

61 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Considerable debate remains regarding the use of posterior cruciate-retaining or posterior cruciate-stabilizing designs for total knee arthroplasty. Multiple studies have investigated kinematic, radiographic, and clinical outcomes of both. Nevertheless, long-term survivorship analyses directly comparing the two designs have not been performed, to our knowledge. Our goal was to analyze the fifteen-year survival of posterior cruciate-retaining and posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements at our institution. Methods: A retrospective review identified 8117 total knee arthroplasties (5389 posterior cruciate-retaining and 2728 posterior cruciate-stabilizing) that had been performed from 1988 to 1998. This range was chosen because both designs were used in high volumes at our institution during this period. Patients were followed via our total joint registry at one, two, and five years after the arthroplasty and every five years thereafter. Aseptic revision surgery was the primary end point of our analysis. Implant survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: Survival at fifteen years was 90% for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 77% for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.001). In knees with preoperative deformity, the fifteen-year survival was 90% for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 75% for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.04). Likewise, in knees without preoperative deformity, the fifteen-year survival was 88% for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 78% for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.001). After adjustment for age, sex, preoperative diagnosis, and preoperative deformity, the risk of revision was significantly lower in knees with a posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacement (p < 0.001; hazard ratio = 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.4 to 0.6). Conclusions: In evaluating the implants used at our institution for total knee arthroplasty during the study period, posterior cruciate-retaining prostheses had significantly improved survival in comparison with posterior cruciate-stabilizing prostheses at fifteen years. Furthermore, this significant difference remained when accounting for age, sex, diagnosis, and deformity. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2072-2078
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery - Series A
Volume93
Issue number22
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 16 2011

Fingerprint

Knee Replacement Arthroplasties
Survival
Knee
Prostheses and Implants
Reoperation
Biomechanical Phenomena
Arthroplasty
Registries
Survival Rate
Joints
Confidence Intervals

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Increased long-term survival of posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements. / Abdel, Matthew; Morrey, Mark E.; Jensen, Matthew R.; Morrey, Bernard F.

In: Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - Series A, Vol. 93, No. 22, 16.11.2011, p. 2072-2078.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d55651800b85481ab4a0d3d060af4e89,
title = "Increased long-term survival of posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements",
abstract = "Background: Considerable debate remains regarding the use of posterior cruciate-retaining or posterior cruciate-stabilizing designs for total knee arthroplasty. Multiple studies have investigated kinematic, radiographic, and clinical outcomes of both. Nevertheless, long-term survivorship analyses directly comparing the two designs have not been performed, to our knowledge. Our goal was to analyze the fifteen-year survival of posterior cruciate-retaining and posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements at our institution. Methods: A retrospective review identified 8117 total knee arthroplasties (5389 posterior cruciate-retaining and 2728 posterior cruciate-stabilizing) that had been performed from 1988 to 1998. This range was chosen because both designs were used in high volumes at our institution during this period. Patients were followed via our total joint registry at one, two, and five years after the arthroplasty and every five years thereafter. Aseptic revision surgery was the primary end point of our analysis. Implant survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: Survival at fifteen years was 90{\%} for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 77{\%} for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.001). In knees with preoperative deformity, the fifteen-year survival was 90{\%} for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 75{\%} for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.04). Likewise, in knees without preoperative deformity, the fifteen-year survival was 88{\%} for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 78{\%} for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.001). After adjustment for age, sex, preoperative diagnosis, and preoperative deformity, the risk of revision was significantly lower in knees with a posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacement (p < 0.001; hazard ratio = 0.5; 95{\%} confidence interval, 0.4 to 0.6). Conclusions: In evaluating the implants used at our institution for total knee arthroplasty during the study period, posterior cruciate-retaining prostheses had significantly improved survival in comparison with posterior cruciate-stabilizing prostheses at fifteen years. Furthermore, this significant difference remained when accounting for age, sex, diagnosis, and deformity. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.",
author = "Matthew Abdel and Morrey, {Mark E.} and Jensen, {Matthew R.} and Morrey, {Bernard F.}",
year = "2011",
month = "11",
day = "16",
doi = "10.2106/JBJS.J.01143",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "93",
pages = "2072--2078",
journal = "Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - American Volume",
issn = "0021-9355",
publisher = "Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery Inc.",
number = "22",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Increased long-term survival of posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements

AU - Abdel, Matthew

AU - Morrey, Mark E.

AU - Jensen, Matthew R.

AU - Morrey, Bernard F.

PY - 2011/11/16

Y1 - 2011/11/16

N2 - Background: Considerable debate remains regarding the use of posterior cruciate-retaining or posterior cruciate-stabilizing designs for total knee arthroplasty. Multiple studies have investigated kinematic, radiographic, and clinical outcomes of both. Nevertheless, long-term survivorship analyses directly comparing the two designs have not been performed, to our knowledge. Our goal was to analyze the fifteen-year survival of posterior cruciate-retaining and posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements at our institution. Methods: A retrospective review identified 8117 total knee arthroplasties (5389 posterior cruciate-retaining and 2728 posterior cruciate-stabilizing) that had been performed from 1988 to 1998. This range was chosen because both designs were used in high volumes at our institution during this period. Patients were followed via our total joint registry at one, two, and five years after the arthroplasty and every five years thereafter. Aseptic revision surgery was the primary end point of our analysis. Implant survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: Survival at fifteen years was 90% for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 77% for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.001). In knees with preoperative deformity, the fifteen-year survival was 90% for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 75% for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.04). Likewise, in knees without preoperative deformity, the fifteen-year survival was 88% for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 78% for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.001). After adjustment for age, sex, preoperative diagnosis, and preoperative deformity, the risk of revision was significantly lower in knees with a posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacement (p < 0.001; hazard ratio = 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.4 to 0.6). Conclusions: In evaluating the implants used at our institution for total knee arthroplasty during the study period, posterior cruciate-retaining prostheses had significantly improved survival in comparison with posterior cruciate-stabilizing prostheses at fifteen years. Furthermore, this significant difference remained when accounting for age, sex, diagnosis, and deformity. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

AB - Background: Considerable debate remains regarding the use of posterior cruciate-retaining or posterior cruciate-stabilizing designs for total knee arthroplasty. Multiple studies have investigated kinematic, radiographic, and clinical outcomes of both. Nevertheless, long-term survivorship analyses directly comparing the two designs have not been performed, to our knowledge. Our goal was to analyze the fifteen-year survival of posterior cruciate-retaining and posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements at our institution. Methods: A retrospective review identified 8117 total knee arthroplasties (5389 posterior cruciate-retaining and 2728 posterior cruciate-stabilizing) that had been performed from 1988 to 1998. This range was chosen because both designs were used in high volumes at our institution during this period. Patients were followed via our total joint registry at one, two, and five years after the arthroplasty and every five years thereafter. Aseptic revision surgery was the primary end point of our analysis. Implant survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: Survival at fifteen years was 90% for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 77% for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.001). In knees with preoperative deformity, the fifteen-year survival was 90% for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 75% for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.04). Likewise, in knees without preoperative deformity, the fifteen-year survival was 88% for posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacements, compared with 78% for posterior cruciate-stabilizing total knee replacements (p < 0.001). After adjustment for age, sex, preoperative diagnosis, and preoperative deformity, the risk of revision was significantly lower in knees with a posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacement (p < 0.001; hazard ratio = 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.4 to 0.6). Conclusions: In evaluating the implants used at our institution for total knee arthroplasty during the study period, posterior cruciate-retaining prostheses had significantly improved survival in comparison with posterior cruciate-stabilizing prostheses at fifteen years. Furthermore, this significant difference remained when accounting for age, sex, diagnosis, and deformity. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=81855174757&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=81855174757&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2106/JBJS.J.01143

DO - 10.2106/JBJS.J.01143

M3 - Article

C2 - 22262378

AN - SCOPUS:81855174757

VL - 93

SP - 2072

EP - 2078

JO - Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - American Volume

JF - Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - American Volume

SN - 0021-9355

IS - 22

ER -