Open Access, Peer-reviewed
pISSN 1226-2102
eISSN 2005-8918
    J Korean Orthop Assoc. 2008 Oct;43(5):631-637. Korean.
    Published online Oct 31, 2008.
    https://doi.org/10.4055/jkoa.2008.43.5.631
    Copyright © 2008 The Korean Orthopaedic Association
    Original Article

    Comparison of Posterior-Cruciate Retaining versus Substituting P.F.C. Total Knee Arthroplasty (A Randomized Study)

    Churl Hong Chun, M.D., Jeong Woo Kim, M.D., Hyun Jun Kim, M.D., Chul Min Lim, M.D. and Kwang Mee Kim*
      • Department of Orthopedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Wonkwang University, Iksan, Korea.
      • *Department of Medicine, Wonkwang University Graduate School, Institute of Wonkwang Medical Science, Iksan, Korea.
    • Address reprint requests to Churl Hong Chun, M.D. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Wonkwang University, 344-2, Shinyong-dong, Iksan, Chunbuk 570-711, Korea. Tel: +82.63-859-1363, Fax: +82.63-852-9329, Email: cch@wonkwang.ac.kr

    Abstract

    Purpose

    To compare the functional results of posterior cruciate-retaining (PCR) and posterior substituting (PS) replacement in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for osteoarthritis.

    Materials and Methods

    A randomized controlled study was carried out to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of PCR and PS primary P.F.C.® TKA. One hundred and sixty eight patients (188 cases), who had a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis, and an intact functioning posterior cruciate ligament, were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomized regardless of the level of posterior cruciate ligament preservation. One hundred and eighty eight cases had a minimum 6-year follow-up, which included 96 and 92 cases in the PCR and PS groups, respectively.

    Results

    The Knee Society Score, the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee rating scores, average flexion contracture and radiologic alignment improved significantly, but there were no significant difference between the two groups. On the other hand, the mean postoperative flexion angles in the PCR and PS knees increased from 114.7° to 121.2° and 119.3° to 131.3°, respectively (p<0.05).

    Conclusion

    There were no significant differences between PCR and PS TKA in the follow-up knee scores. However, the level of postoperative improvement in further flexion was better in the PS group.

    Keywords
    Knee; Posterior cruciate retaining; Posterior cruciate substituting; P.F.C. total knee arthroplasty

    Figures

    Fig. 1
    Preoperative and postoperative flexion angle in the PCR* and PS† TKAs. A significant difference was observed between the PCR and PS TKAs (p<0.05). *Posterior cruciate ligament retaining; †Posterior cruciate ligament substitution.

    Tables

    Table 1
    Preoperative Data of the Patients

    Table 2
    A Comparison of the PCR and PS Total Knee Arthroplasty Group (Unit: mean±SD)

    References

      1. Akisue T, Stulberg BN, Bauer TW, McMahon JT, Wilde AH, Kurosaka M. Histologic evaluation of posterior cruciate ligaments from osteoarthritic knees. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002;400:165–173.
      1. Allain J, Goutallier D, Voisin MC. Macroscopic and histological assessments of the cruciate ligaments in arthrosis of the knee. Acta Orthop Scand 2001;72:266–269.
      1. Andriacchi TP, Galante JO. Retention of the posterior cruciate in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1988;3 Suppl:S13–S19.
      1. Banks SA, Markovich GD, Hodge WA. In vivo kinematics of cruciate-retaining and -substituting knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty 1997;12:297–304.
      1. Catani F, Leardini A, Ensini A, et al. The stability of the cemented tibial component of total knee arthroplasty: posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior-stabilized design. J Arthroplasty 2004;19:775–782.
      1. Dennis DA, Komistek RD, Hoff WA, Gabriel SM. In vivo knee kinematics derived using an inverse perspective technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996;331:107–117.
      1. Ewald FC. The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989;248:9–12.
      1. Freeman MA, Insall JN, Besser W, Walker PS, Hallel T. Excision of the cruciate ligaments in total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1977;126:209–212.
      1. Freeman MA, McLeod HC, Levai JP. Cementless fixation of prosthetic components in total arthroplasty of the knee and hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1983;176:88–94.
      1. Freeman MA, Railton GT. Should the posterior cruciate ligament be retained or resected in condylar nonmeniscal knee arthroplasty? The case for resection. J Arthroplasty 1988;3 Suppl:S3–S12.
      1. Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RC, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989;248:13–14.
      1. Jacobs WC, Clement DJ, Wymenga AB. Retention versus removal of the posterior cruciate ligament in total knee replacement: a systematic literature review within the Cochrane framework. Acta Orthop 2005;76:757–768.
      1. Maruyama S, Yoshiya S, Matsui N, Kuroda R, Kurosaka M. Functional comparison of posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2004;19:349–353.
      1. Matsuda S, Whiteside LA, White SE, McCarthy DS. Knee kinematics of posterior cruciate ligament sacrificed total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997;341:257–266.
      1. Nelissen RG, Hogendoorn PC. Retain or sacrifice the posterior cruciate ligament in total knee arthroplasty? A histopathological study of the cruciate ligament in osteoarthritic and rheumatoid disease. J Clin Pathol 2001;54:381–384.
      1. Nilsson KG, Kärrholm J, Gadegaard P. Abnormal kinematics of the artificial knee. Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis of 10 Miller-Galante and five New Jersey LCS knees. Acta Orthop Scand 1991;62:440–446.
      1. Sorger JI, Federle D, Kirk PG, Grood E, Cochran J, Levy M. The posterior cruciate ligament in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1997;12:869–879.
      1. Straw R, Kulkarni S, Attfield S, Wilton TJ. Posterior cruciate ligament at total knee replacement. Essential, beneficial or a hindrance? J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003;85:671–674.
      1. Stubbs G, Dahlstrom J, Papantoniou P, Cherian M. Correlation between macroscopic changes of arthrosis and the posterior cruciate ligament histology in the osteoarthritic knee. ANZ J Surg 2005;75:1036–1040.
      1. Walker PS, Garg A. Range of motion in total knee arthroplasty. A computer analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1991;262:227–235.
      1. Worland RL, Jessup DE, Johnson J. Posterior cruciate recession in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1997;12:70–73.
    Cited by
    Crossref 1
    Google Scholar 
    MeSH Terms
    Arthroplasty
    Contracture
    Follow-Up Studies
    Hand
    Humans
    Knee
    Osteoarthritis
    Polymerase Chain Reaction
    Posterior Cruciate Ligament
    Metrics
    Share
    Figures
    slide

    1 / 1

    Tables
    slide
    slide

    1 / 2

    PERMALINK