Assessment of improvement in functional outcomes between a novel knee replacement design and conventional designs in 240 patients: a randomized controlled trial

Background and purpose: The introduction and development of new total knee arthroplasty (TKA) implant designs are industry driven. To date, an adequately powered randomized controlled trial (RCT) to provide evidence of the superiority of novel implant designs over conventional ones is often lacking....

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Acta orthopaedica Ročník 96; s. 127 - 134
Hlavní autoři: Irmola, Tero, Reito, Aleksi, Kangas, Jarmo, Eskelinen, Antti, Niemeläinen, Mika, Mattila, Ville M, Moilanen, Teemu
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: Sweden MJS Publishing, on behalf of the Nordic Orthopedic Federation 24.01.2025
Medical Journals Sweden
Témata:
Aged
Arthroplasty
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - instrumentation
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods
Female
Humans
Implants
Knee
Knee Prosthesis
Male
Middle Aged
Osteoarthritis, Knee - surgery
Osteoarthrosis
Prospective Studies
Prosthesis Design
Quality of Life
Recovery of Function
Treatment Outcome
ISSN:1745-3674, 1745-3682, 1745-3682
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:Background and purpose: The introduction and development of new total knee arthroplasty (TKA) implant designs are industry driven. To date, an adequately powered randomized controlled trial (RCT) to provide evidence of the superiority of novel implant designs over conventional ones is often lacking. The aim of our RCT was to investigate the functional outcomes of a novel TKA implant design compared with 2 conventional TKA designs. Primary outcome was difference in the change in Oxford Knee Score (OKS) at 2 years. Secondary outcomes were Forgotten Joint Score, 15D quality of life questionnaire, UCLA activity score, and complications.Methods: We compared functional outcomes between a novel TKA implant design (Persona CR) and 2 conventional designs (NexGen CR, PFC CR). 240 patients with severe knee osteoarthritis were recruited to a pragmatic, single-center, prospective, parallel-group RCT between September 2015 and August 2018. The duration of follow-up was 2 years.Results: Of 240 randomized patients, 225 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (mean age 61.8 years; 67.5% females). The OKS exceeded minimal clinical important difference (MCID) from baseline to 2 years in all 3 treatment groups (Persona CR: 18.9 points, PFC CR: 20.3 points, NexGen CR: 19.4 points). At 2 years the difference between Persona CR and PFC CR in the change score was –1.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] –3.6 to 1.7). Similarly, the difference between Persona CR and NexGen CR was –0.9 (CI –3.6 to 1.9). At the time of final follow-up evaluation, OKS was equivalent between groups, as CI excluded between-group differences larger than 4 points.Conclusion: We showed no clinically relevant differences in functional outcomes measured with OKS, 15D, or FJS between the 2 conventional implant designs and the novel implant design at 2-year follow-up.
Bibliografie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:1745-3674
1745-3682
1745-3682
DOI:10.2340/17453674.2024.42708