These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of standard and gender-specific posterior-cruciate-retaining high-flexion total knee replacements: a prospective, randomised study.
    Author: Kim YH, Choi Y, Kim JS.
    Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2010 May; 92(5):639-45. PubMed ID: 20435999.
    Abstract:
    We undertook a study in which 138 female patients with a mean age of 71.2 years (51 to 82) received a standard NexGen CR-flex prosthesis in one knee and a gender-specific NexGen CR-flex prosthesis in the other. The mean follow-up period was 3.25 years (3.1 to 3.5). The aspect ratios of the standard and gender-specific prostheses were compared with that of the distal femur. The mean post-operative Knee Society knee scores were 94 (70 to 100) and 93 (70 to 100) points and the function scores were 83 (60 to 100) and 84 (60 to 100) points for the standard implants and the gender-specific designs, respectively. The mean post-operative Western Ontario and McMaster Universities score was 26.4 points (0 to 76). Patient satisfaction, the radiological results and the complication rates were similar in the two groups. In those with a standard prosthesis, the femoral component was closely matched in 80 knees (58.0%), overhung in 14 (10.1%) and undercovered the bone in 44 (31.9%). In those with a gender-specific prosthesis, it was closely matched in 15 knees (10.9%) and undercovered the bone in 123 (89.1%). Since we found no significant differences between the two groups with regard to the clinical and radiological results, patient satisfaction or complication rate, the goal of the design of the gender-specific CR-flex prosthesis to improve the outcome was not achieved in our patients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]