Comparison of Cruciate-Sacrificing vs Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Replacement Using a Contemporary Total Knee System.

Abstract

BACKGROUND\nThe use of highly conforming polyethylene tibial inserts in cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty (TKA) often requires posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) release/sacrifice for balancing (CS TKA). The CS TKA relies on the posterior capsule, collateral ligaments, and articular conformity without a cam or post to achieve stability. Using prospectively collected data we compared clinical outcomes of CS TKA to posterior-stabilized (PS) TKA utilizing a contemporary TKA system.\n\n\nMETHODS\nSixty-nine consecutive CS TKAs were compared to 45 consecutive PS TKAs at 2-year minimum follow-up. CS knees were balanced with the PCL released. Preoperative/postoperative range of motion (ROM), Knee Society Scores (KSS), stair function, and squatting ROM were analyzed.\n\n\nRESULTS\nAt minimum 2-year follow up, CS and PS TKA demonstrated significant improvement in ROM (P < .001), KSS (Pain, P < .001; Function, P < .001), and KSS stair function (P < .001), with no revisions. There was no difference in preoperative to postoperative improvements for passive knee ROM (10° (0°-20°) vs 13° (5°-25°); P\xa0= .16), KSS Pain (34 (21-42) vs 38 (24-46); P\xa0= .22), KSS Function (35 (30-50) vs 35 (18-50); P\xa0= .34), and KSS stair function (10 (10-20) vs 10 (0-20); P\xa0= .37) for CS and PS TKA, respectively. CS TKA had higher squatting ROM (P\xa0= .02) at minimum 2-year follow-up compared to PS TKA.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nBoth PS and CS TKA provided significant improvement in clinical outcomes, with no differences in passive ROM, KSS, or stair function postoperatively. Our data support that with proper articular conformity and balancing, cruciate-retaining TKA in a PCL-deficient knee (CS TKA) is appropriate. This may be design specific and further prospective randomized studies are needed to corroborate these findings.