Evaluation of the Medial Stabilized Knee Design Using Data From National Joint Registries and Current Literature

The Medial Pivot Design in Total Knee Arthroplasty

Medial pivot total knee arthroplasty implants are designed to function in a similar manner to that of the native knee with a relatively fixed medial center of rotation and a less conforming lateral compartment that follows an arcuate path. Medial pivot implants in total knee arthroplasty have increased in popularity with many companies offering medial pivot or retrofitted medial congruent implants, and there are variations between the various medial pivot and medial congruent implants. Existing literature on medial pivot implants have demonstrated high survivorship and patient outcomes. More studies are needed to compare newer medial pivot implants with each other and with retrofitted medial congruent implants.

Comparison of postoperative clinical outcome in medial-pivotal and gradually reducing radius design cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty-A multicenter analysis of propensity-matched cohorts

Purpose

To clarify differences in surgery duration, postoperative knee range of motion (ROM), anterior and posterior (AP) laxity, and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) in patients undergoing medial-pivot (MP) and GRADIUS cruciate-retaining (CR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgeries.

Methods

We examined patients who underwent either MP or CR TKA at six different Japanese centres. Patients were propensity score matched for age, sex, and preoperative hip-knee angle (HKA). We compared the groups' average surgery duration, postoperative knee ROM, AP laxity, and FJS 1 year after surgery.

Results

There were 86 study patients: 43 MP and 43 CR TKA matched for age, sex, and preoperative HKA. The MP group enjoyed a significantly shorter surgery duration (89.1 ± 10.9 mins vs. 95.7 ± 12.0 mins, p = 0.0091) and significantly better postoperative knee flexion than the CR group (123.7 ± 9.1° vs. 115.3 ± 12.4°, p < 0.001). The MP had significantly smaller postoperative AP laxity with 30° of knee flexion than the CR group (3.4 ± 1.3 vs. 5.6 ± 2.2 mm, p < 0.001). Conversely, postoperative AP laxity with 90° of knee flexion was significantly larger for the MP group (3.6 ± 1.3 vs. 2.7 ± 1.9 mm, p = 0.0098). There were no between-group differences in postoperative FJS.

Conclusions

The MP group showed better postoperative knee flexion, midrange AP knee stability, and shorter surgery duration.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

The Joint Awareness Score: A Shortened, Simplified, Improved Alternative to the Forgotten Joint Score

Background

The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) is a 12-question patient-reported outcomes measure created to measure a patient's awareness of their artificial joint. The FJS has attained wide usage, though it is not without weaknesses. Our patients report that the semantics of the English translation are flawed and that the 5 answer options for each question are poorly differentiated. Additionally, the FJS will result in no score if 3 or more questions are unanswered. This prompted the development of an alternative patient-reported outcomes measure, the Joint Awareness Score (JAS), that builds upon the core concept of joint awareness underlying the FJS, but that is easier to understand and shorter to complete. We completed an exploratory, pilot study to evaluate this outcomes instrument. Our hypothesis is that the JAS will correlate strongly with the FJS and could be used as a substitute.

Methods

Knee arthroplasty patients in a prospective registry were administered the FJS and the JAS. Internal consistency and correlation were calculated with Cronbach's alpha and Pearson's correlation coefficient, respectively.

Results

This study included 174 patients. Cronbach's alpha for FJS was 0.97 for 6 months and 0.97 for 12 months, whereas JAS was 0.89 at 6 months and 0.85 at 12 months. Pearson correlation comparing FJS and JAS at 6 months was 0.88 (95% confidence interval: 0.83, 0.92) and 0.86 (95% confidence interval: 0.78, 0.92) at 12 months.

Conclusions

The Joint Awareness Score is a new patient-reported outcomes measure that is a substitute for the FJS, with half the number of questions, improved semantics, and simplified answers.

Better flexion and early recovery with medial-stabilized vs single-radius total knee arthroplasty with kinematic alignment: Two-year clinical results

BACKGROUND

There are few studies comparing outcomes in patients with posterior cruciate ligament-sacrificing single-radius (SR) versus medial-stabilized (MS) knee devices. Both types of implants are designed to maximize deep-flexion and to maintain stability throughout the knee flexion arc. The aim of this study was to determine whether two-year outcomes differ between these two implant groups.

METHODS

Two-hundred and ten patients took part in this retrospective cohort single center study. The SR patients (n = 109) were enrolled in one randomized trial, and the MS knees (n = 101) in another. Patient consent and Investigative Review Board approval was obtained. Radiographs and clinical outcomes were gathered preoperatively and at six weeks, six months, one year and two years.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups in terms of preoperative demographic characteristics. The MS group had significantly better knee flexion starting at six months postoperative through two years postoperatively (p < 0.05 - p< 0.001). The Knee Society Pain/Motion score was better in the MS group at one year (95.41 vs 90.86, p < 0.002). The Knee Society Pain score was also better in the MS group starting at six weeks through one year (six weeks: 35.3 vs 30, p = 0.007; one year: 46.4 vs 42.4, p = 0.005, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The MS group had better clinical outcomes than the SR group, with significantly greater knee flexion from six months through two years, better Knee Society Pain scores at six weeks through one year, and higher Knee Society Pain/Motion scores at six weeks and one year postoperatively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Total knee replacement survivorship by Design Philosophy: are we ignoring medial pivot design? Analysis based on the UK National Joint Registry

The UK National Joint Registry(NJR) has not reported total knee replacement (TKR) survivorship based on design phi- losophy alone, unlike its international counterparts. We report outcomes of implant survivorship based on design phi- losophy using data from NJR's 2020 annual report. All TKR implants with an identifiable design philosophy from NJR data were included. Cumulative revision data for cruciate-retaining(CR), posterior stabilised(PS), mobile-bearing(MB) design philosophies was derived from merged NJR data. Cumulative revision data for individual brands of implants with the medial pivot (MP) philosophy were used to calculate overall survivorship for this design philosophy. The all-cause revision was used as the endpoint and calculated to 15 years follow-up with Kaplan-Meier curves. 1,144,384 TKRs were included. CR is the most popular design philosophy (67.4%), followed by PS(23.1%), MB (6.9%) and least commonly MP (2.6%). MP and CR implants showed the best survivorship (95.7% and 95.6% respectively) at 15 years which is statistically significant at, and beyond, 10 years. Observed survivorship was lower at all time points with the PS and MB implants (94.5% for both designs at 15 years). While all design philosophies considered in this study survive well, CR and MP designs offer statistically superior survivorship at and beyond 10 years. MP design performs better than CR beyond 13 years yet, remain the least popular design philosophy used. Publishing data based on knee arthroplasty design phi- losophy would help surgeons when making decisions on implant choice.

Mid-Flexion, Anteroposterior Stability of Total Knee Replacement Implanted with Kinematic Alignment: A Randomized, Quantitative Radiographic Laxity Study with Posterior-Stabilized and Medial-Stabilized Implants

UPDATE

This article was updated on January 4, 2023, because of a previous error, which was discovered after the preliminary version of the article was posted online. On page 16, in Figure 5, the x-axis that had read "P<0.0086" now reads "KSS Pain (p=0.02)," and the value for the MS group that had read "48.9" now reads "48.8."This article was updated on January 6, 2022, because of a previous error. On page 13, in the section entitled "Results," the sentence that had read "However, when only the subset of female subjects was considered, the MS group demonstrated significantly less anteroposterior laxity in 90° of flexion than the MS group (2.3 versus 5.4 mm; p = 0.008)." now reads "However, when only the subset of female subjects was considered, the MS group demonstrated significantly less anteroposterior laxity in 90° of flexion than the PS group (2.3 versus 5.4 mm; p = 0.008)."

BACKGROUND

Stability in mid-flexion is important for satisfactory clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the present study was to compare the anteroposterior stability of knees that had been treated with a posterior-stabilized (PS) device or a medial-stabilized (MS) device. We hypothesized that mid-flexion laxity would be greater in the PS group and that clinical outcome scores would be better for the group with lower laxity.

METHODS

Sixty-three patients who had been randomly selected from a larger randomized, prospective, blinded clinical trial underwent primary TKA with either a PS implant (n = 30) or an MS implant (n = 33). Range of motion, the Knee Society Score (KSS), and the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) were collected, and anteroposterior laxity with the knee in 45° and 90° of flexion was evaluated with stress radiographs.

RESULTS

In 45° of flexion, the MS group demonstrated significantly less total anteroposterior displacement than the PS group (mean, 3.6 versus 16.5 mm; p ≤ 0.0001). In 90° of flexion, the total anteroposterior displacement was not significantly different for the 2 groups when both male and female patients were included (mean, 3.9 versus 5.9; p = 0.07). However, when only the subset of female subjects was considered, the MS group demonstrated significantly less anteroposterior laxity in 90° of flexion than the PS group (2.3 versus 5.4 mm; p = 0.008). The groups did not differ significantly in terms of preoperative age, body mass index, sex distribution, FJS, KSS, or range of motion, and they also did not differ in terms of postoperative FJS or range of motion. However, all 33 patients in the MS group returned to sports as indicated in question 12 of the FJS, compared with 19 subjects in the PS group (p = 0.0001). The postoperative KSS Pain, Pain/Motion, and Function scores were all significantly higher in the MS group than the PS; specifically, the mean KSS Pain score was 48.8 in the MS group, compared with 44.8 in the PS group (p = 0.02); the mean KSS Pain/Motion score was 98.4 in the MS group, compared with 89.5 in the PS group (p < 0.0001); and the mean KSS Function score was 95.5 in the MS group, compared with 85.7 in the PS group (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Mid-flexion laxity was greater in patients with PS implants than in those with MS implants, and laxity in 90° was greater in the subset of female patients in the PS group. The decreased laxity observed in the MS group correlated with higher KSS Pain, Pain/Motion, and Function scores as well as with a higher rate of return to sports activities.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Medial Pivot Designs Versus Conventional Bearing Types in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Medial pivot (MP) designs are growing in popularity. They provide increased sagittal plane stability and theoretically replicate some aspects of native joint kinematics, which may improve total knee arthroplasty outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared MP designs with cruciate-retaining, posterior-stabilized (PS), ultracongruent, or mobile-bearings in primary total knee arthroplasty, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The primary outcome measures were all clinical function scores, patient-reported outcome measures, and range of motion. The secondary outcome was complications. Two authors independently selected studies, performed data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment. Studies at high risk of bias were excluded from meta-analysis. Treatment effects were assessed using random-effects meta-analysis and quantified using pooled mean differences or incidence rate differences as appropriate.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs met inclusion criteria. Five compared MP with PS, two with ultracongruent, and one with cruciate-retaining and mobile-bearing. In total, 350 knees were randomized to MP and 375 to conventional bearings. One RCT was excluded from meta-analysis because of high risk of bias. Meta-analysis comparing MP with PS only was possible and found no differences at any time points for any outcome measure, including 2-year follow-up for Oxford Knee Score (MD = 0.35 favoring PS; 95% CI -0.49 to 1.20) and range of motion (MD = 1.58 favoring MP; 95% CI -0.76 to 11.92, P = 0.30) and 12 months for Western Ontario Arthritis Index (MD = 4.42 favoring MP; 95% CI -12.04 to 3.20, P = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no difference in clinical outcomes, with contemporary measurement tools, at any time points, between MP and PS. There are insufficient RCTs comparing MP with other bearings.

Outcomes are Better With a Medial-Stabilized vs a Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Implanted With Kinematic Alignment

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus whether a posterior-stabilized (PS) total knee device is superior to a more congruent, cruciate-substituting, medial-stabilized device (MS). This study compared the clinical outcomes of these devices. The primary hypothesis was that the clinical outcomes would be better in the MS group implanted with kinematic alignment.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized, single-center Level 1 study compared the outcomes of 99 patients who received a PS device and 101 patients who received an MS device implanted with kinematic alignment. Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent were obtained. Clinical and radiographic assessments were performed preoperatively, 6 weeks, 6 months, and annually.

RESULTS

All subjects reached the minimum follow-up of 2 years. There were no statistically significant differences in demographic characteristics, preoperative scores, or alignment (preoperative or postoperative). Tourniquet time was 7.24% longer for the PS group (40.28 min vs 37.56 min, P < .0086). There were significant differences between groups for the 1-year and 2-year Knee Society scores, Forgotten Joint Score, and ROM; in every case favoring the MS group. The FJS was 68.3 in the MS group at 2 years and 58.3 in the PS group (P = .02). The maximum flexion at 2 years was 132° in the MS group and 124° in the PS group (P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

The clinical outcomes of the MS group at 1 and 2 years were better. At the minimum 2-year follow-up, the results demonstrate the superiority of the medial-stabilized device in terms of multiple clinical outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Kinematic comparison between asymmetrical and symmetrical polyethylene inserts during deep knee bend activity

BACKGROUND

The in vivo kinematic benefit of an asymmetrical polyethylene insert is still unknown in comparison with that of a symmetrical insert with the same femoral component design. The purpose of this study was to analyze the kinematic differences between symmetrical and asymmetrical polyethylene inserts and to detect the kinematic benefit in the asymmetrical polyethylene insert. The hypotheses are that greater axial rotation and more posterior rollback are observed in the asymmetrical polyethylene insert.

METHODS

The patients were randomly allocated to the following two groups: total knee arthroplasty with a symmetrical insert and with an asymmetrical insert. In vivo knee kinematics was analyzed in asymmetrical (17 knees) and symmetrical (16 knees) inserts using an image matching technique. The symmetrical polyethylene insert had the same geometry on both sides, whereas the asymmetrical polyethylene insert had a flat surface on the postero-lateral side. The anterior/posterior position and axial rotation were compared between the two polyethylene inserts.

RESULTS

The femoral component was significantly positioned posteriorly at 70° (p = 0.016) and 80° (p = 0.040) of knee flexion and externally rotated at 80° of knee flexion (p = 0.040) in the asymmetrical polyethylene insert as compared to the position of the symmetrical polyethylene insert. Femoral rollback and axial rotation from full extension to maximum flexion were greater in the asymmetrical polyethylene insert, although the difference was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

In the asymmetrical polyethylene insert, slight kinematic benefit with greater axial rotation and more posterior rollback was observed in comparison with the symmetrical polyethylene insert. Further research should be required whether the kinematic benefit of an asymmetrical polyethylene insert will lead to better patient satisfaction and function.

Comparative Analysis of Contemporary Fixed Tibial Inserts: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Multiple options are available for the tibial insert in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). A systematic review (SR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) could assist with decision making. We aim to show that designs with increased conformity may improve function and satisfaction without an increase in complications though posterior stabilized (PS) inserts will likely have more flexion.

Methods

A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed. Studies were limited to RCTs evaluating cruciate retaining (CR), PS, anterior stabilized (AS), medial pivot (MP), bicruciate retaining (BR), and bicruciate stabilizing (BCS) inserts. Mean differences (MD) were used for patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and odds ratios (OR) for reoperation rates and MUA. A systematic review was performed for satisfaction.

Results

27 trials were identified. The NMA showed no difference from a statistical or clinical standpoint for PROMs evaluated. There was a statistical difference for increased flexion for PS knees (3 degrees p 0.04). There were no differences in the MUA or reoperation rates. There was insufficient information to determine if a specific insert improved satisfaction.

Discussion

The results of this NMA show no statistical or clinical difference in PROMs. There was higher flexion for PS knees though the amount was not clinically significant. There was insufficient data for conclusions on patient satisfaction. Therefore, the surgeon should evaluate the clinical situation to determine the best insert rather than choose and insert based on functional scores, patient satisfaction, or complication rates.

Implant Malalignment may be a Risk Factor for Poor Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures (PROMs) Following Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA)

BACKGROUND

Implant malalignment may be a risk factor for poor patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

Postoperative surveys were administered to assess PROMs regarding satisfaction, pain, and function in 262 patients who underwent surgery at 4 centers in the U.S. and U.K (average age, 67.2) at a mean 5.5 years after primary TKA. Postoperative distal femoral angle (DFA), proximal tibial angle (PTA), and posterior tibial slope angle (PSA) were radiographically measured, and outliers were recorded. PROMs were compared between patients with aligned versus malaligned knees using univariate analysis.

RESULTS

Patients with DFA, PTA, and PSA outliers were more likely to experience similar or decreased activity levels postoperatively than patients with no alignment outliers, as were patients with 1 or 2 outliers of any kind (P < .05). Patients with DFA, PTA, and PSA outliers were significantly more likely to be dissatisfied with their ability to perform activities of daily living (ADLs), as were patients with 1 or 2 outliers of any kind (P < .05). Patients with DFA and PSA outliers were more likely to be dissatisfied with their degree of pain relief, as were patients with 2 outliers of any kind (P < .05). Finally, patients with DFA and PSA outliers, as well as those with 1 outlier of any kind, were more likely to be dissatisfied with their overall knee function (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

DFA, PTA, and PSA outliers represent a significant risk factor for decreased satisfaction with activities of daily living(ADLs), pain relief, and knee function, as well as decreased activity levels.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Similar migration for medial congruent and cruciate-retaining tibial components in an anatomic TKA system: a randomized controlled trial of 60 patients followed with RSA for 2 years

Background and purpose - There is an ongoing debate regarding the appropriate level of constraint in primary TKA. To provide increased stability and better kinematics, more resembling a natural knee, a medial congruent (MC) tibial insert has been introduced. To investigate potential impact on implant migration, we evaluated the cemented Persona TKA, randomizing between MC and cruciate-retaining (CR) tibial designs. Patients and methods - 60 patients with primary osteoarthritis were randomized to either the CR or MC tibial component. Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) examinations, evaluating translational and rotational migration as well as maximal total point motion (MTPM), were performed on the first postoperative day, at 3 months, and 1 and 2 years after surgery. Preoperative, and 1- and 2-year patientreported outcome measures (PROMs) data (KOOS and FJS) were collected. Results - The mean tibial MTPM at 3 months were 0.48 mm (95% CI 0.37-0.58) and 0.56 mm (0.45-0.67) for the CR and MC respectively. 2 years postoperatively the respective values were 0.62 mm (0.50-0.73) and 0.73 mm (0.49-0.96). There was no statistically significant difference in migration between groups, for either the femoral or the tibial component, regarding x-, y-, and z-translations or rotations. Both CR and MC groups improved as expected in PROM scores pre- to postoperatively, but without a statistically significant difference between groups. There were no revisions or other serious adverse events related to surgery. Interpretation - The results are promising, indicating good fixation for both designs, and this is in line with other well-performing TKAs on the market. The increased medial congruity of the MC inlay does not seem to affect the migration or the PROMs up to 2 years.

Medial stabilised total knee arthroplasty achieves comparable clinical outcomes when compared to other TKA designs: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare clinical and patient-reported outcome measures of medially stabilised (MS) TKA when compared to other TKA designs.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses algorithm was used. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EMCARE databases were searched to June 2020. Studies with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up comparing an MS TKA design to any other TKA design were included. The statistical analysis was completed using Review Manager (RevMan), Version 5.3.

RESULTS

The 22 studies meeting the inclusion criteria included 3011 patients and 4102 TKAs. Overall Oxford Knee Scores were significantly better (p = 0.0007) for MS TKA, but there was no difference in the Forgotten Joint Scores (FJS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Knee Society Score (KSS)-Knee, KSS-Function, and range of motion between MS and non-MS TKA designs. Significant differences were noted for sub-group analyses; MS TKA showed significantly worse KSS-Knee (p = 0.02) and WOMAC (p = 0.03) scores when compared to Rotating Platform (RP) TKA while significantly better FJS (p = 0.002) and KSS-knee scores (p = 0.0001) when compared to cruciate-retaining (CR) TKA.

CONCLUSION

This review and meta-analysis show that MS TKA designs result in both patient and clinical outcomes that are comparable to non-MS implants. These results suggest implant design alone may not provide further improvement in patient outcome following TKA, surgeons must consider other factors, such as alignment to achieve superior outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

No difference in 13-year survival after medial pivot or central pivot mobile bearing total knee arthroplasty. A propensity matched comparative analysis

PURPOSE

The present study was designed to evaluate the long-term results (more than 10 years) of mobile bearing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and to compare the survival of medial pivot axis (MPA) and central pivot axis (CPA) TKAs. The primary hypothesis was that the 10- to 15-year survival rate of MPA TKAs will be better than CPA TKAs.

METHODS

A national, multicenter, retrospective study was performed in France. In this case-control design, 1154 TKAs were paired into the CPA group (control group: 577 cases) and MPA group (study group: 577 cases) based on a logistic regression analysis of age, gender, body mass index and severity of the coronal deformity, defining the propensity score for each case. Final survival information follow-up was obtained for 946 cases (82%).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the control and study groups for any baseline data. Twenty-two prosthetic revisions (2%) were performed for mechanical reasons during the follow-up period. There was no significant difference between the 13-year survival rates of CPA (98%) and MPA (97%) TKAs. There was no significant difference between groups in their final Oxford and Knee Society scores.

CONCLUSION

Our findings do not support the assumption that medialization of the pivot axis of a mobile bearing TKA improves clinical results or survival.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Clinical impact of component placement in manually instrumented total knee arthroplasty : a systematic review

AIMS

The goal of the current systematic review was to assess the impact of implant placement accuracy on outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using the Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science databases in order to assess the impact of the patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) and implant placement accuracy on outcomes following TKA. Studies assessing the impact of implant alignment, rotation, size, overhang, or condylar offset were included. Study quality was assessed, evidence was graded (one-star: no evidence, two-star: limited evidence, three-star: moderate evidence, four-star: strong evidence), and recommendations were made based on the available evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 49 studies were identified for inclusion. With respect to PROMs, there was two-star evidence in support of mechanical axis alignment (MAA), femorotibial angle (FTA), femoral coronal angle (FCA), tibial coronal angle (TCA), femoral sagittal angle (FSA), femoral rotation, tibial and combined rotation/mismatch, and implant size/overhang or offset on PROMs, and one-star evidence in support of tibial sagittal angle (TSA), impacting PROMs. With respect to survival, there was three- to four-star evidence in support FTA, FCA, TCA, and TSA, moderate evidence in support of femoral rotation, tibial and combined rotation/mismatch, and limited evidence in support of MAA, FSA, and implant size/overhang or offset impacting survival.

CONCLUSION

Overall, there is limited evidence to suggest that PROMs are impacted by the accuracy of implant placement, and malalignment does not appear to be a significant driver of the observed high rates of patient dissatisfaction following TKA. However, FTA, FCA, TCA, TSA, and implant rotation demonstrate a moderate-strong relationship with implant survival. Efforts should be made to improve the accuracy of these parameters in order to improve TKA survival. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(9):1449-1456.

Mid-term survivorship and clinical outcomes of the medial stabilized systems in primary total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review

Introduction

Medial Pivot Total Knee Arthroplasty was introduced in clinical practice in 1990s to reproduce the in vivo-natural knee kinematics. This design is characterized by an asymmetric constraint profile, with aa highly congruent medial compartment, and a less congruent lateral compartment. Short-term outcomes of the medial pivot systems in primary knee arthroplasty have been widely reported in the current literature, however, only few studies have described results beyond 5-year follow-up.

Objectives

The primary objectives of this systematic review of the literature is to analyze the mid-term studies on medial pivot total knee arthroplasty focusing on the reoperation rate, survivorship and clinical outcome scores.

Methods

The US National Library of Medicine (PubMed/MEDLINE), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were queried for publications from January 1980 to December 2019 utilizing the following keywords: "medial pivot", "medial stabilized", "medial rotating", "medial congruent", medial ball and socket", "arthroplasty", "TKA", "TKR", and "knee surgery".

Results

18 articles met the inclusion criteria for the present study. The average quality was 11.4 for non-comparative studies and 21.7 for comparative studies based on MINORS criteria. A total 2832 knee arthroplasties were included for the final analysis with an average age of 69 years, and an average follow-up of 8.1 years (minimum 5 years). The overall reoperation rate was 2.4%, with periprosthetic joint infection as the leading cause of revision in 0.9% of cases, followed by aseptic loosening in 0.4% of cases. The average Knee Society Score improved to a mean preoperative score of 40.1 to a mean postoperative score of 89.2. The functional knee society score improved from a mean preoperative score of 44.8 to an average postoperative score of 82.9. The global range of motion improved from 104.8° preoperatively to 115.6° postoperatively.

Conclusion

We found that medial pivot system in primary total knee arthroplasty provide overall mid-term survivorship comparable to other standard implasnts. In addition, medial pivot system is associated with better high-end function compared to standard implants.