BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders (Jan 2023)

Clinical advantages of gradually reducing radius versus multi-radius total knee arthroplasty: a noninferiority randomized trial

  • Sakkadech Limmahakhun,
  • Anuchit Chaiamporn,
  • Kasisin Klunklin,
  • Warakorn Jingjit

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06177-4
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 9

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background The rationale for gradually reducing radius (GR) femoral component aims to prevent flexion instability by gradually change the center of femoral rotation, unlike a discrete change by the multi-radius (MR) which is more common for most of total knee arthroplasties (TKA). However, no strong evidence has been reported the clinical significance of the GR design. Methods This patient-blinded, parallel, non-inferiority trial conducted in September 2020. Patients with knee osteoarthritis consented for cruciate retaining TKA were randomly allocated to a GR or MR group. Primary outcome measures were knee functions at postoperative 6 and 12 months using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Secondary outcome measures were performance-based tests (30-s chair stand test, 40-m fast paced walk test, and 3-m timed up and go test), and knee motions. Results Sixty patients were enrolled and randomized; GR (n = 30) and MR (n = 30) group. The changes of KOOS at 6 and 12 months from baseline showed clinical meaningful for both GR and MR group. At 6 and 12 months postoperatively, there was no significant difference between both groups in all KOOS subscales. The length of stay was not different between GR and MR group (5.93 ± 1.44 vs 6.17 ± 1.86 days, p = 0.59). Patients on both groups presented similar performance-based tests. However, the improvement in degrees of knee motion for the GR group was significantly greater than the MR group (34.67 ± 12.52 vs 23.67 ± 12.59, p = 0.001). Conclusion GR was noninferiority to MR for the functional outcomes and performances after TKA. The GR femoral component gave more knee motions than did the MR prostheses. Level of evidence Level I, therapeutic study.

Keywords