Dergiler / Joint diseases and related surgery / 2021 / Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 1

A comparison of SanatMetal Sanat Swing and Zimmer NexGen® total knee implants: 10-year postoperative follow-up results

Sayfa
10–16
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Experiences with the operative technique and comparative evaluation, the Sanat Swing system is a safe and reliable alternative for total knee replacement, providing a user-friendly operative technique and shorter operation time.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objectives: In this study, we present our 10-year postoperative follow-up results of Sanat Swing® and NexGen® total knee implants.Patientsandmethods:A total of 189 patients (93 males, 96 females; mean age: 68 years; range, 48 to 86 years) who underwent total knee replacement between January 2008 and September 2010 were retrospectively analyzed.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:A total of 105 patients (Group A) were implanted a cemented Sanat Swing knee prosthesis and 84 patients (Group B) were implanted a cemented NexGen knee prosthesis.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Experiences with the operative technique and comparative evaluation, the Sanat Swing system is a safe and reliable alternative for total knee replacement, providing a user-friendly operative technique and shorter operation time.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2008 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Objectives: In this study, we present our 10-year postoperative follow-up results of Sanat Swing® and NexGen® total knee implants.Patientsandmethods:A total of 189 patients (93 males, 96 females; mean age: 68 years; range, 48 to 86 years) who underwent total knee replacement between January 2008 and September 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 105 patients (Group A) were implanted a cemented Sanat Swing knee prosthesis and 84 patients (Group B) were implanted a cemented NexGen knee prosthesis. Operation time, range of motion (ROM), pain level, Knee Society Score (KSS), distance of painless walking, and the ability to climb stairs were evaluated between the groups.Results: The mean follow-up was 10.8 (range, 9.8 to 12.3) years. No significant difference was observed in the survival of the prostheses, ROM, pain level, KSS, walking distance, and in the ability to climb stairs between the two groups at 10 years. With an experienced team, the operation time was about 4 to 5 min shorter in the Sanat Swing implantation group. In selected cases, Sanat Swing was superior to the NexGen system; however, there was no statistically significant difference. Complication rates were also low and comparable between both groups.Conclusion: Based on the 10 years of follow-up evaluation, Sanat Swing total knee replacement system seems to yield comparable clinical results with the NexGen. Experiences with the operative technique and comparative evaluation, the Sanat Swing system is a safe and reliable alternative for total knee replacement, providing a user-friendly operative technique and shorter operation time.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ABONYI, B., PAP, K., GAL, T., VASARHELYI, G., UDVARHELYI, I., HANGODY, L. (2022). A comparison of SanatMetal Sanat Swing and Zimmer NexGen® total knee implants: 10-year postoperative follow-up results. Joint diseases and related surgery, Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 1, 10–16. https://ajindex.com/articles/559204

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Font-Rodriguez DE, Scuderi GR, Insall JN. Survivorship of cemented total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997;(345):79-86
  2. Rodriguez JA, Bhende H, Ranawat CS. Total condylar knee replacement: a 20-year followup study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;(388):10-7
  3. Lacko M, Schreierová D. Comparison of survival rate and risk of revision for mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee replacements. Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi 2019;30:70-8
  4. Atik OŞ, Turan S. To sacrifice or replace the posterior cruciate ligament in primary total knee arthroplasty? Jt Dis Relat Surg 2020;31:656-7
  5. Baker PN, Khaw FM, Kirk LM, Esler CN, Gregg PJ. A randomised controlled trial of cemented versus cementless press-fit condylar total knee replacement: 15-year survival analysis. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2007;89:1608-14
  6. Bozic KJ, Kinder J, Meneghini RM, Zurakowski D, Rosenberg AG, Galante JO. Implant survivorship and complication rates after total knee arthroplasty with a third-generation cemented system: 5 to 8 years followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005;(430):117-24
  7. Schiavone Panni A, Falez F, D'Apolito R, Corona K, Perisano C, Vasso M. Long-term follow-up of a non-randomised prospective cohort of one hundred and ninety two total knee arthroplasties using the NexGen implant. Int Orthop 2017;41:1155-62
  8. Oh KJ, Goodman SB, Yang JH. Prospective, randomized study between Insall-Burstein II and NexGen legacy with a minimum 9-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 2011;26:1232-8
  9. Sartawi M, Zurakowski D, Rosenberg A. Implant survivorship and complication rates after total knee arthroplasty with a third-generation cemented system: 15-year follow-up. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 2018;47
  10. Kane RL, Saleh KJ, Wilt TJ, Bershadsky B. The functional outcomes of total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2005;87:1719-24
  11. Chun KC, Lee SH, Baik JS, Kook SH, Han JK, Chun CH. Clinical and radiological results of cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty with the NexGen®-CR system: comparison of patellar resurfacing versus retention with more than 14 years of follow-up. J Orthop Surg Res 2017;12:144
  12. Montonen E, Laaksonen I, Matilainen M, Eskelinen A, Haapakoski J, Puhto AP, et al. What is the long-term survivorship of cruciate-retaining TKA in the finnish registry? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2018;476:1205-11
  13. Mayne A, Harshavardhan HP, Johnston LR, Wang W, Jariwala A. Cruciate Retaining compared with Posterior Stabilised Nexgen total knee arthroplasty: results at 10 ye