Send to

Choose Destination
J Arthroplasty. 2009 Sep;24(6 Suppl):33-8. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.03.013. Epub 2009 May 15.

A randomized controlled trial comparing "high-flex" vs "standard" posterior cruciate substituting polyethylene tibial inserts in total knee arthroplasty.

Author information

London Health Sciences Center, London, Ontario, Canada.


The purpose of this study is to compare the range of motion and clinical outcomes of a standard posterior-stabilized (PS) vs the high-flex (HF) polyethylene tibial insert of a posterior cruciate substituting total knee arthroplasty system. One hundred patients were entered into a prospective, blinded, randomized clinical trial in which 50 patients received a Genesis II PS insert and 50 patients received a Genesis II HF insert (Smith & Nephew, Memphis, TN). At an average follow-up of 2.7 years (range, 2.3-3.1 years), there were no differences in any outcome measures (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index, Short-Form 12, Knee Society clinical rating scores, anterior knee pain). There were no differences (P = .811) in average knee flexion at 2 years (standard, 123 degrees +/- 7 degrees; HF, 124 degrees +/- 7 degrees). In summary, this prospective blinded randomized clinical trial demonstrated no differences between a PS and HF polyethylene design. Long-term evaluation will be required to comment on differences in polyethylene wear and implant longevity.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center