Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Clin Med Res. 2015 Mar;7(3):171-5. doi: 10.14740/jocmr2048w. Epub 2014 Dec 29.

Reduced operating time but not blood loss with cruciate retaining total knee arthroplasty.

Author information

1
Department of Orthopedics and Trauma, University of Medicine and Pharmacy "Victor Babes", Timisoara, Romania.
2
Vest University "Vasile Goldis", Arad, Romania.
3
Calabrodental Clinic, Maxillofacial Unit, Crotone, Italy ; Marrelli Hospital, Orthopedics and Traumatology Unit, Crotone, Italy.
4
Department of Interdisciplinary Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Italy.
5
Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, Medical Faculty, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Italy.
6
Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, Medical Faculty, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Italy ; These authors contributed equally to this research paper.
7
Calabrodental Clinic, Maxillofacial Unit, Crotone, Italy ; Tecnologica Research Institute, Biomedical Section, Crotone, Italy ; These authors contributed equally to this research paper.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

There is no consensus regarding the use of retaining or replacing cruciate implants for patients with limited deformity who undergo a total knee replacement. Scope of this paper is to evaluate whether a cruciate sparing total knee replacement could have a reduced operating time compared to a posterior stabilized implant.

METHODS:

For this purpose, we performed a randomized study on 50 subjects. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon in the same conditions to minimize bias and only knees with a less than 20 varus deviation and/or maximum 15° fixed flexion contracture were included.

RESULTS:

Surgery time was significantly shorter with the cruciate retaining implant (P = 0.0037). The mean duration for the Vanguard implant was 68.9 (14.7) and for the NexGen II Legacy was 80.2 (11.3). A higher range of motion, but no significant Knee Society Scores at 6 months follow-up, was used as controls.

CONCLUSIONS:

In conclusion, both implants had the potential to assure great outcomes. However, if a decision has to be made, choosing a cruciate retaining procedure could significantly reduce the surgical time. When performed under tourniquet, this gain does not lead to reduced blood loss.

KEYWORDS:

Anatomic single bundle; Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; Incomplete tears; Meniscus in situ

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center