Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Orthopaedics
Published in: International Orthopaedics 8/2010

01-12-2010 | Original Paper

Five-year results of the Innex total knee arthroplasty system

Authors: Urs K. Munzinger, Nicola A. Maffiuletti, Thomas Guggi, Mario Bizzini, Stefan Preiss, Tomas Drobny

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 8/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

The clinical and radiographic results of 174 female and 86 male Innex (Zimmer, Warsaw, Indiana) mobile bearing total knee arthroplasty systems (245 patients) were evaluated, with particular emphasis on gender-related differences at five-year follow-up. Pre-operative Knee Society (KS) function and total scores were lower in women than in men. All KS scores showed a significant improvement at follow-up, but women still obtained lower KS function scores than men. Self-reported function was significantly better for male knees. No gender differences were observed for component alignment, while the occurrence of radiolucent lines, endosteal cavitations, and wear was significantly greater in male knees. Male Innex mobile bearing knees exhibited better clinical function and satisfaction than their female peers at five-year follow-up, despite inferior radiographic findings and higher revision rates.
Literature
1.
Anderson JG, Wixson RL, Tsai D et al (1996) Functional outcome and patient satisfaction in total knee patients over the age of 75. J Arthroplasty 11:831–840CrossRefPubMed
2.
Asif S, Choon DSK (2005) Midterm results of cemented press fit condylar Sigma total knee arthroplasty system. J Orthop Surg 13:280–284
3.
4.
Bauman S, Williams D, Petruccelli D et al (2007) Physical activity after total joint replacement: a cross-sectional survey. Clin J Sports Med 17:104–108CrossRef
5.
Chana R, Shenava Y, Nicholl AP et al (2008) Five- to 8-year results of the uncemented Duracon total knee arthoplasty system. J Arthroplasty 23:677–682CrossRefPubMed
6.
Edwald FC (1989) The knee society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:9–12
7.
8.
Gyssler BG (2004) Developing a mobile bearing knee prosthesis. In: Munzinger UK, Boldt J, Keblish P (eds) Primary knee arthroplasty. Springer, Berlin, pp 18–24
9.
Hawker G, Wright J, Coyte P et al (1998) Health-related quality of life after knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80:163–173PubMed
10.
Hawker GA, Wright JG, Coyte PC et al (2000) Differences between men and women in the rate of use of hip and knee arthroplasty. N Engl J Med 342:1016–1022CrossRefPubMed
11.
Harrysson OLA, Robertsson O, Nayfesh JF (2004) Higher cumulative revision rate of knee arthroplasties in younger patients with osteoarthritis? Clin Orthop Relat Res 421:162–168CrossRefPubMed
12.
Heck DA, Robinson RL, Partridge CM et al (1998) Patient outcomes after knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 356:93–110CrossRefPubMed
13.
Horwitz MD, Awan S, Chatoo MB et al (2009) An 8- to 10-year review of the Rotaglide total knee replacement. Int Orthop 33:111–115CrossRefPubMed
14.
Huck SW (2004) Reading statistics and research. Pearson Education, Boston
15.
Hudd A, Kunasingam K, Ricketts D et al (2009) A 5 to 8 year follow-up study of the Rotaglide mobile bearing total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 33:675–678CrossRefPubMed
16.
Indelli PF, Aglietti P, Buzzi R et al (2002) The Insall-Burstein II prosthesis. A 5- to 9-year follow-up study in osteoarthritic knees. J Arthroplasty 17:544–549CrossRefPubMed
17.
Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD et al (1989) (1989) Rationale of the knee society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:13–14PubMed
18.
19.
Karlson EW, Daltroy LH, Liang MH et al (1997) Gender differences in patient preference may underlie differential utilization of elective surgery. Am J Med 102:524–530CrossRefPubMed
20.
Lim JTK, Luscombe KL, Jones PW et al (2006) The effect of pre-operative symptom severity on functional outcome of total knee replacement-patients with the lowest pre-operative scores achieve the lowest marks. Knee 13:216–219CrossRefPubMed
21.
MacDonald SJ, Charron KD, Bourne RB et al (2008) Gender-specific total knee replacement. Prospectively collected clinical outcomes. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:2612–2616CrossRefPubMed
22.
Paterson D (1993) International documentation and evaluation system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 290:306–307PubMed
23.
Rand JA, Illstrup DM (1991) Survivorship analysis of total knee arthroplasty. Cumulative rates of survival of 9200 total knee arthroplasties. J Bone J Surg Am 73:397–409
24.
Ritter MA, Wing JT, Berend ME et al (2008) The clinical effect of gender on outcome of total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 23:331–336CrossRefPubMed
25.
Robertsson O, Dunbar M, Pehrsson T et al (2000) Patient satisfaction after knee arthroplasty. A report on 27372 knees operated on between 1981 and 1995 in Sweden. Acta Orthop Scand 71:262–267CrossRefPubMed
26.
Robinson RP (2005) Five-year follow-up of primary Optetrak posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasties in osteoarthritis. J Arthroplasty 20:927–931CrossRefPubMed
27.
Röder C, Eggli S, EL-Kerdi A et al (2003) The international documentation and evaluation system (IDES)—10-years experience. Int Orthop 27:259–261CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Five-year results of the Innex total knee arthroplasty system
Authors
Urs K. Munzinger
Nicola A. Maffiuletti
Thomas Guggi
Mario Bizzini
Stefan Preiss
Tomas Drobny
Publication date
01-12-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
International Orthopaedics / Issue 8/2010
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-009-0887-x

Other articles of this Issue 8/2010

International Orthopaedics 8/2010 Go to the issue

Original Paper

The UniSpacer™: correcting varus malalignment in medial gonarthrosis

Original Paper

Total shoulder arthroplasty in dislocation arthropathy

Original Paper

To what extent does leg length discrepancy impair motor activity in patients after total hip arthroplasty?

Original Paper

A histological and ultrastructural study of femoral head cartilage in a new type II collagenopathy

Original Paper

Immediate recovery room radiographs after primary total knee arthroplasty—why do we keep doing them?

Original Paper

In vivo experimental study of hat type cervical intervertebral fusion cage (HCIFC)