Comparison of the PFC Sigma fixed-bearing and rotating-platform total knee arthroplasty in the same patient: short-term results.

This study compares the fixed-bearing PFC Sigma Total Knee Arthroplasty to the recently introduced rotating-platform version of the same design in 26 patients. At an average follow-up time of 46 months for the fixed-bearing side and 16 months for the rotating-platform side, no significant differences were found in terms of knee preference, knee pain, range of motion, overall satisfaction, or Knee Society scores (KSSs). No revisions, subluxations, dislocations, or infections were seen. Also no radiographic evidence of component loosening, osteolysis, or malalignment was found in any knee. The results of cementing the PFC Sigma rotating-platform, posterior-stabilized total knee show excellent patient satisfaction at 1 year and comparable clinical and radiographic results to the fixed-bearing version.

[1]  F. Buechel,et al.  Twenty-Year Evaluation of Meniscal Bearing and Rotating Platform Knee Replacements , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[2]  J. Szivek,et al.  Average and peak contact stress distribution evaluation of total knee arthroplasties. , 1996, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[3]  F F Buechel,et al.  Long-term survivorship analysis of cruciate-sparing versus cruciate-sacrificing knee prostheses using meniscal bearings. , 1990, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[4]  P. Walker,et al.  The Dominance of Cyclic Sliding in Producing Wear in Total Knee Replacements , 1991, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[5]  D. D’Lima,et al.  Tibiofemoral Conformity and Kinematics of Rotating-Bearing Knee Prostheses , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[6]  C. Ranawat,et al.  Total knee arthroplasty rehabilitation protocol: what makes the difference? , 2003, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[7]  C. Ranawat,et al.  Survivorship analysis and results of total condylar knee arthroplasty. Eight- to 11-year follow-up period. , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[8]  L. Dorr,et al.  Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. , 1989, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[9]  R. Bourne,et al.  Medium-term results of a mobile bearing total knee replacement. , 1999, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[10]  M. Ritter,et al.  Long-term survival analysis of the posterior cruciate condylar total knee arthroplasty , 1989 .

[11]  R. Scott,et al.  Twelve years' experience with posterior cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. , 1986, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[12]  D. Bartel,et al.  The effect of conformity, thickness, and material on stresses in ultra-high molecular weight components for total joint replacement. , 1986, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[13]  G. Engh,et al.  Modular Tibial Insert Micromotion: A Concern With Contemporary Knee Implants , 1998, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[14]  G. Engh,et al.  The Coventry Award. Modular tibial insert micromotion. A concern with contemporary knee implants. , 1998 .

[15]  J. Fisher,et al.  An experimental model of tibial counterface polyethylene wear in mobile bearing knees: the influence of design and kinematics. , 1999, Bio-medical materials and engineering.

[16]  C. Ranawat,et al.  Impact of modern technique on long-term results of total condylar knee arthroplasty. , 1994, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[17]  R C Johnston,et al.  Cemented Rotating-Platform Total Knee Replacement: A Nine to Twelve-Year Follow-up Study* , 2000, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[18]  J. Callaghan.  Mobile-Bearing Knee Replacement: Clinical Results: A Review of the Literature , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[19]  S. Stern,et al.  Posterior stabilized prosthesis. Results after follow-up of nine to twelve years. , 1992, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[20]  F. F. Buechel,et al.  The New Jersey low-contact-stress knee replacement system: Biomechanical rationale and review of the first 123 cemented cases , 2004, Archives of orthopaedic and traumatic surgery.

[21]  F. C. Ewald.  The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. , 1989, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[22]  G. Engh,et al.  Failure of the polyethylene bearing surface of a total knee replacement within four years. A case report. , 1988, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[23]  J. Callaghan,et al.  Cemented rotating-platform total knee replacement. a concise follow-up, at a minimum of fifteen years, of a previous report. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[24]  T. Thornhill,et al.  Total knee arthroplasty with the PFC system , 1998 .

[25]  Young-Hoo Kim,et al.  Comparison of Fixed-Bearing and Mobile-Bearing Total Knee Arthroplasties , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[26]  D. D’Lima,et al.  Comparison Between the Kinematics of Fixed and Rotating Bearing Knee Prostheses , 2000, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.