Skip to content

Comparison Of Outcomes After Knee Arthroplasty Using Posterior-Substituting Versus Cruciate-Retaining Prostheses

Comparison Of Outcomes After Bilateral Simultaneous Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Posterior-Substituting Versus Cruciate-Retaining Prostheses

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06170931
Enrollment
24
Registered
2023-12-14
Start date
2021-04-14
Completion date
2024-07-01
Last updated
2024-12-06

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Total Knee Arthroplasty

Keywords

Knee, total knee arthroplasty, posterior cruciate ligament-substituting, posterior cruciate ligament-retaining

Brief summary

Total knee replacement is used in the treatment of patients with knee arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis and other knee disorders. Today, there are basically two designs; It cuts the posterior cruciate ligament (PS) and protects the posterior cruciate ligament (CR). Although there is no clear study suggesting which design is better, research on this subject has increased recently. the investigators aim is to define the superiority of these two designs over each other. Preoperative and postoperative joint range of motion examinations were performed on both knees separately. WOMAC and OXFORD scores were examined separately for both knees.

Detailed description

Total knee arthroplasty is used to treat patients with osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and other knee disorders. Today, there are basically two primary designs; posterior cruciate Substituting (PS) and protects the posterior cruciate -Retaining (CR). However, it is still controversial which approach is good, as both CR and PS have advantages and disadvantages. Proponents of the posterior cruciate retaining system argue that it provides natural stability, wider joint range of motion, better proprioception, and better knee kinematics. In addition, proponents of the posterior cruciate substituting system argue that it provides more harmonious articulation and a wider flexion range. As a result, although there is no clear study suggesting which design is better, research on this subject has increased recently. Our aim is to define the superiority of these two designs over each other. Patients with the same stage of knee osteoarthritis in both knees were selected. Total knee arthroplasty was performed in the same session by making the appropriate design for the appropriate knee simultaneously. Preoperative and postoperative joint range of motion examinations were performed on both knees separately. WOMAC and OXFORD scores were examined separately for both knees.

Interventions

PROCEDUREposterior cruciate ligament-retaining prostheses

Posterior cruciate ligament protective approach in patients with knee osteoarthritis

PROCEDUREposterior cruciate ligament-substituting prostheses

Posterior cruciate ligament transection approach in patients with knee osteoarthritis

Sponsors

Bezmialem Vakif University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Patients with the same stage of knee osteoarthritis in both knees were selected. Total knee arthroplasty was performed in the same session by making the appropriate design for the appropriate knee simultaneously. Preoperative and postoperative joint range of motion examinations were performed on both knees separately. WOMAC and OXFORD scores were examined separately for both knees.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. Patients with primary osteoarthritis of both knees 2. Patients with secondary osteoarthritis of both knees

Exclusion criteria

1. Patients with primary osteoarthritis in both knees and undergoing unilateral knee prosthesis 2. Patients with secondary osteoarthritis in both knees and who underwent unilateral knee prosthesis 3. Patients with primary osteoarthritis in both knees and who underwent bilateral knee prosthesis in different sessions 4. Patients with secondary osteoarthritis in both knees and who underwent bilateral knee prosthetics in different sessions.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Range of motions3 yearPreoperative and postoperative knee flexion and extension degrees of the patients were measured.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
WOMAC Score (Score from 0 to 100)3 yearPreoperative and postoperative WOMAC score of the patients were examined.
OXFORD Knee Score(Score from 0 to 60)3 yearPreoperative and postoperative OXFORD score of the patients were examined.

Countries

Turkey (Türkiye)

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026