There are comparatively few randomized studies evaluating knee arthroplasty prostheses, and fewer still that report longer-term functional outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate mid-term outcomes of an existing implant trial cohort to document changing patient function over time following total knee arthroplasty using longitudinal analytical techniques and to determine whether implant design chosen at time of surgery influenced these outcomes. A mid-term follow-up of the remaining 125 patients from a randomized cohort of total knee arthroplasty patients (initially comprising 212 recruited patients), comparing modern (Triathlon) and traditional (Kinemax) prostheses was undertaken. Functional outcomes were assessed with the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), knee range of movement, pain numerical rating scales, lower limb power output, timed functional assessment battery, and satisfaction survey. Data were linked to earlier assessment timepoints, and analyzed by repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) mixed models, incorporating longitudinal change over all assessment timepoints.Aims
Methods
Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is an established
and successful procedure. However, the design of prostheses continues
to be modified in an attempt to optimise the functional outcome
of the patient. The aim of this study was to determine if patient outcome after
TKA was influenced by the design of the prosthesis used. A total of 212 patients (mean age 69; 43 to 92; 131 female (62%),
81 male (32%)) were enrolled in a single centre double-blind trial
and randomised to receive either a Kinemax (group 1) or a Triathlon
(group 2) TKA. Patients were assessed pre-operatively, at six weeks, six months,
one year and three years after surgery. The outcome assessments
used were the Oxford Knee Score; range of movement; pain numerical
rating scales; lower limb power output; timed functional assessment
battery and a satisfaction survey. Data were assessed incorporating
change over all assessment time points, using repeated measures
analysis of variance longitudinal mixed models. Implant group 2
showed a significantly greater range of movement (p = 0.009), greater
lower limb power output (p = 0.026) and reduced report of ‘worst
daily pain’ (p = 0.003) over the three years of follow-up. Differences
in Oxford Knee Score (p = 0.09), report of ‘average daily pain’
(p = 0.57) and timed functional performance tasks (p = 0.23) did
not reach statistical significance. Satisfaction with outcome was
significantly better in group 2 (p = 0.001). These results suggest that patient outcome after TKA can be influenced
by the prosthesis used. Cite this article:
Instability is the reason for revision of a primary
total knee replacement (TKR) in 20% of patients. To date, the diagnosis
of instability has been based on the patient’s symptoms and a subjective
clinical assessment. We assessed whether a measured standardised
forced leg extension could be used to quantify instability. A total of 25 patients (11 male/14 female, mean age 70 years;
49 to 85) who were to undergo a revision TKR for instability of
a primary implant were assessed with a Nottingham rig pre-operatively
and then at six and 26 weeks post-operatively. Output was quantified
(in revolutions per minute (rpm)) by accelerating a stationary flywheel.
A control group of 183 patients (71 male/112 female, mean age 69
years) who had undergone primary TKR were evaluated for comparison. Pre-operatively, all 25 patients with instability exhibited a
distinctive pattern of reduction in ‘mid-push’ speed. The mean reduction
was 55 rpm ( Cite this article: