Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2020; 55(01): 082-087
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1697971
Artigo Original
Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Medium-term Results Evaluation between Gender-Specific x Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty Prostheses[*]

Article in several languages: português | English
José Luiz Colleoni 
1   Grupo do Joelho da Disciplina de Ortopedia e Traumatologia do Hospital Estadual Mário Covas, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC (FMABC), Santo André, SP, Brasil
,
Fernando Noel Ribeiro
1   Grupo do Joelho da Disciplina de Ortopedia e Traumatologia do Hospital Estadual Mário Covas, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC (FMABC), Santo André, SP, Brasil
,
Alexwell Rodrigues Campos
1   Grupo do Joelho da Disciplina de Ortopedia e Traumatologia do Hospital Estadual Mário Covas, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC (FMABC), Santo André, SP, Brasil
,
Djalma de Siqueira Junior
1   Grupo do Joelho da Disciplina de Ortopedia e Traumatologia do Hospital Estadual Mário Covas, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC (FMABC), Santo André, SP, Brasil
,
Alysson Guedes Campos
1   Grupo do Joelho da Disciplina de Ortopedia e Traumatologia do Hospital Estadual Mário Covas, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC (FMABC), Santo André, SP, Brasil
,
Paulo Augusto Castro Mos
1   Grupo do Joelho da Disciplina de Ortopedia e Traumatologia do Hospital Estadual Mário Covas, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC (FMABC), Santo André, SP, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

03 July 2018

21 August 2018

Publication Date:
05 November 2019 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective To compare the postoperative functional result of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with gender-specific prosthesis versus TKA with conventional prosthesis in a 5-year period.

Methods Retrospective study with functional evaluation of 30 patients (15 patients from each group) using scores (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], Western Ontario and McMaster Universities arthritis index [WOMAC], and The Knee Society Clinical Rating System [KSS]) and range of motion (ROM) as methods of assessment.

Results The differences found between the score values and ROM were not statistically significant.

Conclusion The gender-specific prosthesis presents functional results equal to those of conventional prosthesis after 5 years postoperatively.

Keywords

knee arthroplasty - female - outcome assessment

* Study developed at Knee Group of the Orthopedics and Traumatology Discipline of the Hospital Estadual Mário Covas, Faculty of Medicine of ABC (FMABC), Santo André, SP, Brazil.


 

  • Referências

  • 1 Ritter MA, Wing JT, Berend ME, Davis KE, Meding JB. The clinical effect of gender on outcome of total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2008; 23 (03) 331-336
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Font-Rodriguez DE, Scuderi GR, Insall JN. Survivorship of cemented total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997; ; ( (345) 79-86
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Rand JA, Ilstrup DM. Survivorship analysis of total knee arthroplasty. Cumulative rates of survival of 9200 total knee arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1991; 73 (03) 397-409
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Hitt K, Shurman 2nd JR, Greene K. , et al. Anthropometric measurements of the human knee: correlation to the sizing of current knee arthroplasty systems. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85-A (Suppl. 04) 115-122
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 5 Poilvache PL, Insall JN, Scuderi GR, Font-Rodriguez DE. Rotational landmarks and sizing of the distal femur in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996; ; ( (331) 35-46
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Livingston LA. The quadriceps angle: a review of the literature. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1998; 28 (02) 105-109
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Woodland LH, Francis RS. Parameters and comparisons of the quadriceps angle of college-aged men and women in the supine and standing positions. Am J Sports Med 1992; 20 (02) 208-211
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Chin KR, Dalury DF, Zurakowski D, Scott RD. Intraoperative measurements of male and female distal femurs during primary total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 2002; 15 (04) 213-217
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Booth Jr RE. Sex and the total knee: gender-sensitive designs. Orthopedics 2006; 29 (09) 836-838
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Mahfouz M, Booth Jr R, Argenson J, Merkl BC, Abdel Fatah EE, Kuhn MJ. Analysis of variation of adult femora using sex specific statistical atlases. In: Paper presented at: The 7th International Symposium on Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering; 2006 Mar 22–25; Côte d'Azur, France.
  • 11 Johnson AJ, Costa CR, Mont MA. Do we need gender-specific total joint arthroplasty?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469 (07) 1852-1858
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Song EK, Park SJ, Yoon TR, Park KS, Seo HY, Seon JK. Hi-flexion and gender-specific designs fail to provide significant increases in range of motion during cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27 (06) 1081-1084
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Singh H, Mittal V, Nadkarni B, Agarwal S, Gulati D. Gender-specific high-flexion knee prosthesis in Indian women: a prospective randomised study. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2012; 20 (02) 153-156
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Barrett WP. The need for gender-specific prostheses in TKA: does size make a difference?. Orthopedics 2006; ; 29 (09) , Suppl) S53 –S55
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 MacDonald SJ, Charron KD, Bourne RB, Naudie DD, McCalden RW, Rorabeck CH. The John Insall Award: gender-specific total knee replacement: prospectively collected clinical outcomes. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008; 466 (11) 2612-2616
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Fehring TK, Odum SM, Hughes J, Springer BD, Beaver Jr WB. Differences between the sexes in the anatomy of the anterior condyle of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91 (10) 2335-2341
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Merchant AC, Arendt EA, Dye SF. , et al. The female knee: anatomic variations and the female-specific total knee design. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008; 466 (12) 3059-3065
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Gillespie RJ, Levine A, Fitzgerald SJ. , et al. Gender differences in the anatomy of the distal femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 93 (03) 357-363
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Guy SP, Farndon MA, Sidhom S, Al-Lami M, Bennett C, London NJ. Gender differences in distal femoral morphology and the role of gender specific implants in total knee replacement: a prospective clinical study. Knee 2012; 19 (01) 28-31
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Kim YH, Choi Y, Kim JS. Comparison of a standard and a gender-specific posterior cruciate-substituting high-flexion knee prosthesis: a prospective, randomized, short-term outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92 (10) 1911-1920
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Greene KA. Gender-specific design in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22 (07) (Suppl. 03) 27-31
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Robertsson O, Dunbar M, Pehrsson T, Knutson K, Lidgren L. Patient satisfaction after knee arthroplasty: a report on 27,372 knees operated on between 1981 and 1995 in Sweden. Acta Orthop Scand 2000; 71 (03) 262-267
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Khaw FM, Kirk LM, Morris RW, Gregg PJ. A randomised, controlled trial of cemented versus cementless press-fit condylar total knee replacement. Ten-year survival analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2002; 84 (05) 658-666
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Scuderi GR, Insall JN, Windsor RE, Moran MC. Survivorship of cemented knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1989; 71 (05) 798-803
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Mihalko W, Fishkin Z, Krackow K. Patellofemoral overstuff and its relationship to flexion after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 449 (449) 283-287
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Kim YH, Sohn KS, Kim JS. Range of motion of standard and high-flexion posterior stabilized total knee prostheses. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87 (07) 1470-1475
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Clarke HD, Hentz JG. Restoration of femoral anatomy in TKA with unisex and gender-specific components. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008; 466 (11) 2711-2716
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Ritter MA, Berend ME, Harty LD, Davis KE, Meding JB, Keating EM. Predicting range of motion after revision total knee arthroplasty: clustering and log-linear regression analyses. J Arthroplasty 2004; 19 (03) 338-343
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar