Abstract
Introduction
The Signature system has been hailed as a new way to perform arthroplasty of the knee. It combines the accuracy in restoring mechanical axes of navigation with the convenience and familiarity of classical surgical techniques. With this comes the expectation that they should produce better functional results. In the literature, thus far, there is little data to corroborate this. The aim of this paper is to compare the early functional outcomes of this with the cemented AGC knee replacement system.
Methods
Since April 2010, based on requirement, 25 patients underwent Signature knee replacements during this period for symptomatic degenerative or inflammatory arthritis with varying levels of deformity. Oxford functional scores were taken pre-operatively, at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. These were then matched to an equal number of patients that had undergone an AGC knee replacement by the same surgeon. They were matched by pre-operative functional Oxford scores, age and gender.
Results
The mean age for our patients was 63.4 years at the time of surgery. The mean follow-up period was 6.9 months. There have been no revision procedures required or complications in either group so far. The mean pre-operative Oxford score was 44.4, 26.3, 25 and 19 pre-operatively, at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months respectively for the Signature knee group. No link was seen between pre-operative function and post-operative scores. The AGC group has had comparable results thus far at scores 43.2, 28.4, 20.1 and 19.7 respectively. More results are to follow.
Conclusions
To our knowledge this is one of the earliest reports of functional results following the new technique of knee mechanical axis restoration for arthroplasty surgery. The system showed comparable results at similar post-operative time periods with the conventionally performed AGC knee replacement system.
