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 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Osteoarthrosis | Research article

Patient reported outcomes and implant survivorship after Total knee arthroplasty with the persona knee implant system: two year follow up

Authors: N. M. C. Mathijssen, H. Verburg, N. J. London, M. Landsiedl, M. Dominkus

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

More personalized implant designs for total knee arthroplasty might optimize the clinical outcome after surgery. One of these personalized implant designs is the Persona knee implant system (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, Indiana, USA). The primary objective of this study was to determine patient reported outcomes and implant survivorship of the Persona Knee system used in primary total knee arthroplasty, up to two years after surgery.

Methods

From November 2013 to July 2016 consecutive patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty were enrolled in a prospective observational cohort study at three centers. Preoperatively, at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 and 2 years after surgery, patients completed the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), the Knee Society Score (KSS, 2011, modified version) and the EQ-5D. Adverse Events were captured, assessed for relationship to device, and recorded in the study database. Furthermore, physical functioning was assessed by the orthopedic surgeon.
Repeated measures analyses were performed on PROM scores. Kaplan Meier was used to calculate survivorship of the Persona Knee Implant System.

Results

A total of 146 total knee arthroplasties were performed. 61% (89/146) of the patients were female and mean age was 64.7 (± 6.9) years. Two years after surgery, one patient had a revision of the polyethylene insert because of a periprosthetic joint infection. Therefore, the Kaplan-Meier survival estimate at 2 years was 0.99 (0.95–1.00 95% CI).
OKS increased from 22.1 (95% CI 20.9–23.3) to 41.8 (95% CI 40.6–43.1) two years after surgery. Furthermore, all other PROMs also increased from before surgery to 2 year postoperatively.

Conclusion

The Persona Knee implant is safe and effective and the clinical results up to two years after surgery are promising. PROMs results are very good; pain, function and quality of life all improved greatly after TKA. Further studies are needed to determine the long term clinical performance of the Persona prosthesis.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02337244). Registered June 1st, 2015. Retrospectively registered.
Literature
1.
Wallace IJ, Worthington S, Felson DT, Jurmain RD, Wren KT, Maijanen H, et al. Knee osteoarthritis has doubled in prevalence since the mid-20th century. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(35):9332–6.CrossRef
2.
Inacio MCS, Paxton EW, Graves SE, Namba RS, Nemes S. Projected increase in total knee arthroplasty in the United States - an alternative projection model. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2017;25(11):1797–803.CrossRef
3.
NiemelaInen MJ, MaKela KT, Robertsson O, A WD, Furnes O, Fenstad AM, et al. Different incidences of knee arthroplasty in the Nordic countries. Acta Orthop. 2017;88(2):173–8.CrossRef
4.
Andriacchi TP, Hurwitz DE. Gait biomechanics and total knee arthroplasty. Am J Knee Surg. 1997;10(4):255–60.PubMed
5.
Rajgopal A, Aggarwal K, Khurana A, Rao A, Vasdev A, Pandit H. Gait parameters and functional outcomes after Total knee arthroplasty using persona knee system with cruciate retaining and Ultracongruent knee inserts. J Arthroplast. 2017;32(1):87–91.CrossRef
6.
Dai Y, Scuderi GR, Bischoff JE, Bertin K, Tarabichi S, Rajgopal A. Anatomic tibial component design can increase tibial coverage and rotational alignment accuracy: a comparison of six contemporary designs. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(12):2911–23.CrossRef
7.
Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS)--development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;28(2):88–96.CrossRef
8.
Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(1):63–9.CrossRef
9.
Noble PC, Scuderi GR, Brekke AC, Sikorskii A, Benjamin JB, Lonner JH, et al. Development of a new knee society scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(1):20–32.CrossRef
10.
EuroQol G. EuroQol--a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16(3):199–208.CrossRef
11.
Fitzmaurice G LN, Ware J Applied Longitudinal Analyses. 2 ed2011.
12.
The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register. Annual Report.
13.
Dyrhovden GS, Lygre SHL, Badawy M, Gothesen O, Furnes O. Have the causes of revision for Total and Unicompartmental knee arthroplasties changed during the past two decades? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475(7):1874–86.CrossRef
14.
Jergesen HE, Yi PH. Early complications in hip and knee arthroplasties in a safety net hospital vs a university center. J Arthroplast. 2016;31(4):754–8.CrossRef
15.
Courtney PM, Boniello AJ, Berger RA. Complications following outpatient Total joint arthroplasty: an analysis of a National Database. J Arthroplast. 2017;32(5):1426–30.CrossRef
16.
Wylde V, Hewlett S, Learmonth ID, Dieppe P. Persistent pain after joint replacement: prevalence, sensory qualities, and postoperative determinants. Pain. 2011;152(3):566–72.CrossRef
17.
Indelli PF, Pipino G, Johnson P, Graceffa A, Marcucci M. Posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty: a matched pair analysis of a classic and its evolutional design. Arthroplast Today. 2016;2(4):193–8.CrossRef
18.
19.
Digital N. Provisional quarterly patient reported outcome measures (PROMs0 in Geland, April 2016 to march 2017–February 2018 release. 2018.
20.
Pandit H, Hamilton TW, Jenkins C, Mellon SJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW. The clinical outcome of minimally invasive phase 3 Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a 15-year follow-up of 1000 UKAs. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B(11):1493–500.CrossRef
21.
White SH, Roberts S, Kuiper JH. The cemented twin-peg Oxford partial knee replacement survivorship: a cohort study. Knee. 2015;22(4):333–7.CrossRef
22.
Monticone M, Ferrante S, Salvaderi S, Motta L, Cerri C. Responsiveness and minimal important changes for the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score in subjects undergoing rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;92(10):864–70.CrossRef
23.
Collins NJ, Prinsen CA, Christensen R, Bartels EM, Terwee CB, Roos EM. Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS): systematic review and meta-analysis of measurement properties. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2016;24(8):1317–29.CrossRef
24.
Clement ND, MacDonald D, Simpson AH. The minimal clinically important difference in the Oxford knee score and short form 12 score after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(8):1933–9.CrossRef
25.
Beard DJ, Harris K, Dawson J, Doll H, Murray DW, Carr AJ, et al. Meaningful changes for the Oxford hip and knee scores after joint replacement surgery. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(1):73–9.CrossRef
26.
Matharu GS, McBryde CW, Robb CA, Pynsent PB. An analysis of Oxford hip and knee scores following primary hip and knee replacement performed at a specialist Centre. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B(7):928–35.CrossRef
27.
Jacobs CA, Christensen CP. Correlations between knee society function scores and functional force measures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(9):2414–9.CrossRef
28.
Judge A, Arden NK, Kiran A, Price A, Javaid MK, Beard D, et al. Interpretation of patient-reported outcomes for hip and knee replacement surgery: identification of thresholds associated with satisfaction with surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94(3):412–8.CrossRef
29.
Baker PN, Deehan DJ, Lees D, Jameson S, Avery PJ, Gregg PJ, et al. The effect of surgical factors on early patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) following total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94(8):1058–66.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Patient reported outcomes and implant survivorship after Total knee arthroplasty with the persona knee implant system: two year follow up
Authors
N. M. C. Mathijssen
H. Verburg
N. J. London
M. Landsiedl
M. Dominkus
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-019-2470-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2019 Go to the issue

Research article

Mapping of both column acetabular fractures with three-dimensional computed tomography and implications on surgical management

Research article

Developing a group intervention to manage fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis through modifying physical activity

Research article

Do psychological factors or radiographic severity play a role in the age of onset in symptomatic developmental dysplasia of hip and femoroacetabular impingement syndrome?

Research article

Clinical features, management, and outcome of iliopsoas abscess associated with cardiovascular disorders: a hospital-based observational case series study

Research article

A cadaveric study of the morphology of the extensor hallucis longus - a proposal for a new classification

Research article

Comparison of imaging parameters pre- and post- reductive procedure for atlantoaxial dislocation via posterior fixation using pedicle screw and rod: a cross-sectional study