This prospective randomised controlled double-blind trial compared two types of PFC Sigma total knee replacement (TKR), differing in three design features aimed at improving flexion. The outcome of a standard fixed-bearing posterior cruciate ligament-preserving design (FB-S) was compared with that of a high-flexion rotating-platform posterior-stabilised design (RP-F) at one year after TKR.

The study group of 77 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee comprised 37 men and 40 women, with a mean age of 69 years (44.9 to 84.9). The patients were randomly allocated either to the FB-S or the RP-F group and assessed pre-operatively and at one year post-operatively. The mean post-operative non-weight-bearing flexion was 107° (95% confidence interval (CI) 104° to 110°)) for the FB-S group and 113° (95% CI 109° to 117°) for the RP-F group, and this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.032). However, weight-bearing range of movement during both level walking and ascending a slope as measured during flexible electrogoniometry was a mean of 4° lower in the RP-F group than in the FB-S group, with 58° (95% CI 56° to 60°) versus 54° (95% CI 51° to 57°) for level walking (p = 0.019) and 56° (95% CI 54° to 58°) versus 52° (95% CI 48° to 56°) for ascending a slope (p = 0.044). Further, the mean post-operative pain score of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index was significantly higher in the RP-F group (2.5 (95% CI 1.5 to 3.5) versus 4.2 (95% CI 2.9 to 5.5), p = 0.043).

Although the RP-F group achieved higher non-weight-bearing knee flexion, patients in this group did not use this during activities of daily living and reported more pain one year after surgery.

Modifications in the design of knee replacements have been proposed in order to maximise flexion. We performed a prospective double-blind randomised controlled trial to compare the functional outcome, including maximum knee flexion, in patients receiving either a standard or a high flexion version of the NexGen legacy posterior stabilised total knee replacement. A total of 56 patients, half of whom received each design, were assessed pre-operatively and at one year after operation using knee scores and analysis of range of movement using electrogoniometry. For both implant designs there was a significant improvement in the function component of the knee scores (p < 0.001) and the maximum range of flexion when walking on the level, ascending and descending a slope or stairs (all p < 0.001), squatting (p = 0.020) and stepping into a bath (p = 0.024). There was no significant difference in outcome, including the maximum knee flexion, between patients receiving the standard and high flexion designs of this implant.