File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

Supplementary

Conference Paper: Prospective randomized controlled trial comparing range of motion after standard and high-flexion posterior stabilized total knee prosthesis

TitleProspective randomized controlled trial comparing range of motion after standard and high-flexion posterior stabilized total knee prosthesis
Authors
Issue Date2008
PublisherSICOT/SIROT.
Citation
SICOT/SIROT 2008, XXIV Triennial World Congress, Hong Kong, 24-28 August 2008, p. Abstract no.16379 How to Cite?
AbstractINTRODUCTION: There is an increasing demand for a better ROM in patients receiving TKR. The design of the prosthesis has been modified to allow deep flexion to occur. However, there is still controversy whether this can lead to a clinically significant improvement in flexion range. METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing ROM after standard and high-flexion designed prosthesis was done in 24 patients receiving one-stage bilateral TKR (high-flexion NexGen LPS Flex in one knee and a standard version NexGen LPS in another knee). All the operations were done by the same surgeon with the same operative and rehabilitation protocol. The maximum knee flexion was measured at the final follow-up. RESULTS: The mean preoperative knee flexion was 106°. There was no difference between the high-flexion designed group and standard version group in terms of the preoperative knee flexion, preoperative mechanical alignment, postoperative mechanical alignment, position of the implanted components in coronal and sagittal plane, change in joint line, flexion gap balance and presence of residual posterior femoral condyle osteophyte. At a minimum follow-up of four years, there was no difference in the maximum knee flexion between the high-flexion designed group (115°) and standard version group (114°) (p=0.606, paired t test; beta error=0.055). CONCLUSION: In a group of patients having a preoperative knee flexion <130°, the use of a TKR of a high-flexion design ex hibited no additional benefit in terms of postoperative knee flexion when compared with a standard version prosthesis.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/62578

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorYau, WP-
dc.contributor.authorChiu, PKY-
dc.date.accessioned2010-07-13T04:04:20Z-
dc.date.available2010-07-13T04:04:20Z-
dc.date.issued2008-
dc.identifier.citationSICOT/SIROT 2008, XXIV Triennial World Congress, Hong Kong, 24-28 August 2008, p. Abstract no.16379-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/62578-
dc.description.abstractINTRODUCTION: There is an increasing demand for a better ROM in patients receiving TKR. The design of the prosthesis has been modified to allow deep flexion to occur. However, there is still controversy whether this can lead to a clinically significant improvement in flexion range. METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing ROM after standard and high-flexion designed prosthesis was done in 24 patients receiving one-stage bilateral TKR (high-flexion NexGen LPS Flex in one knee and a standard version NexGen LPS in another knee). All the operations were done by the same surgeon with the same operative and rehabilitation protocol. The maximum knee flexion was measured at the final follow-up. RESULTS: The mean preoperative knee flexion was 106°. There was no difference between the high-flexion designed group and standard version group in terms of the preoperative knee flexion, preoperative mechanical alignment, postoperative mechanical alignment, position of the implanted components in coronal and sagittal plane, change in joint line, flexion gap balance and presence of residual posterior femoral condyle osteophyte. At a minimum follow-up of four years, there was no difference in the maximum knee flexion between the high-flexion designed group (115°) and standard version group (114°) (p=0.606, paired t test; beta error=0.055). CONCLUSION: In a group of patients having a preoperative knee flexion <130°, the use of a TKR of a high-flexion design ex hibited no additional benefit in terms of postoperative knee flexion when compared with a standard version prosthesis.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherSICOT/SIROT.-
dc.relation.ispartofSICOT/SIROT World Congress-
dc.titleProspective randomized controlled trial comparing range of motion after standard and high-flexion posterior stabilized total knee prosthesis-
dc.typeConference_Paper-
dc.identifier.emailYau, WP: peterwpy@hkucc.hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailChiu, PKY: pkychiu@hkucc.hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityYau, WP=rp00500-
dc.identifier.authorityChiu, PKY=rp00379-
dc.identifier.hkuros162560-
dc.identifier.spageAbstract no.16379-
dc.identifier.epageAbstract no.16379-
dc.publisher.placeHong Kong-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats