A comparison of four models of total knee-replacement prostheses

[Guest guest]

Found this interesting article here:

http://www.ejbjs.org/cgi/content/abstract/58/6/754

JN Insall, CS Ranawat, P Aglietti and J Shine

Twenty-nine knees with unicondylar, sixty-four with duocondylar, fifty

with Guepar, and fifty with geometric prostheses were studied. The

follow-up ranged from two to three and one-half years. The unicondylar

prosthesis was used in the mildest cases and gave the least

complications, but the quality of results was not superior to that

achieved with the other prostheses. The duocondylar model was best

suited for knees with rheumatoid arthritis and mild deformity. The

geometric prosthesis was the best condylar prosthesis for

osteoarthritis with moderate to severe deformity, but gave the worst

results in knees with rheumatoid arthritis. The Guepar prosthesis was

used in the worst knees and gave the best results, but it had the

highest infection rate and was the most difficult to salvage. A

radiolucency was observed in about 60 per cent of the condylar

replacements around the tibial component and in 45 per cent of the

Geupar replacements around the femoral component. The significance of

this cannot yet be determined but it suggest that the fixation may not

be ideal. In all types, residual pain was most frequently attributed

to the patellar compartment. Patellectomy was not a solution.