Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013 Dec;21(12):2730-6. doi: 10.1007/s00167-012-2117-0. Epub 2012 Jun 29.

No difference in ROM and knee function between mobile and floating platforms in TKA.

Author information

1
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Vienna General Hospita Austria, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria, johannes.holinka@meduniwien.ac.at.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the floating platforms (FP) were superior to rotating platforms (RP) in computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty (TKA) comparing the range of motion (ROM) as well as clinical and subjective function of the knee.

METHODS:

This retrospective non-randomized single-centre cohort study includes 255 patients with a primary implanted computer-navigated e.motion™ (Aesculap B. Braun) TKA system, implanted because of clinical and radiological verified gonarthrosis. In 129 patients, the FP platform was implanted, and in 126 patients, the RP platform. As statistical procedures for differences between inlay type RP/FP in ROM and Knee Society Score (KSS) after 3- and 24-month follow-up, an analysis of covariance (with risk factors gender, age, BMI, preoperative ROM and preoperative KSS) was performed.

RESULTS:

Although preoperative ROM and knee society function score (KSS part II) were significantly higher in the FP group before surgery, there was no significant difference between RP and FP in ROM and KSS at 3- and 24-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION:

The FP platform design did not have an advantage in ROM as well as in clinical and subjective knee function compared with the RP platform in computer-navigated TKA neither in early follow-up examinations at 3 months postoperatively nor at long-time follow-up at 24 months postoperatively.

PMID:
22744436
DOI:
10.1007/s00167-012-2117-0
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center