Comparative study on mid- and long-term clinical effects of medial pivot prosthesis and posterior-stabilized prosthesis after total knee arthroplasty

• Main Authors: Weipeng Shi, Yaping Jiang, Changyao Wang, Haining Zhang, Yingzhen Wang, Tao Li
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2020-09-01
• Series: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
• Subjects: Medial pivot prosthesis; Posterior-stabilized prosthesis; Total knee arthroplasty; Mid- and long-term; Clinical effect
• Online Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13018-020-01951-9

Abstract Objective The purpose of this study was to explore the mid-and long-term clinical effects of Chinese patients with medial pivot (MP) prosthesis and posterior-stabilized (PS) prosthesis after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), to provide a reference for the recommendation of clinical prostheses. Methods A retrospective analysis of 802 patients who received TKA was performed from June 2010 to December 2013. A total of 432 patients received a MP prosthesis (MP group) and 375 patients received a PS prosthesis (PS group). Postoperative range of motion (ROM), clinical scores including the knee scoring system (KSS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC), the forgotten joint score (FJS), and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. Results A total of 527 patients were followed up, including 290 in the MP group and 237 in the PS group. Both groups achieved satisfactory results in terms of KSS score, WOMAC score, and postoperative ROM, which were significantly improved compared with those before surgery, but the difference between the groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The FJS scores of the MP group and the PS group were satisfactory and no significant difference was observed (P = 0.426). Postoperative complications occurred in 5 and 11 patients in the MP group and PS group, respectively. Conclusion The clinical results of TKA with MP or PS in Chinese patients at mid- and long-term are encouraging, and no significant differences were observed between the two types of prostheses. Studies have also shown that both prostheses are safe for Chinese patients.