Modern TKA implants are equivalent to traditional TKA implants in functional and patellofemoral joint-related outcomes.

purposeTo compare patient-reported outcomes measures, health-related quality of life and satisfaction rates between a new Modern TKA system (M-TKA) and an existing Traditional TKA system (T-TKA).

methodsProspectively collected registry data of 65 patients who underwent T-TKA and 65 patients who underwent M-TKA at a single institution from 2014 to 2015 was reviewed. The range of motion, Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS), Function Score (KSFS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), SF-36, satisfaction and expectation fulfilment were compared at Pre-op, 6 months and 2 years. Patellofemoral joint-related OKS subscores (3, 5, 7, 12) were also compared between the groups. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in OKS/SF-36 were analysed for both groups. Propensity scores generated using logistic regression were used to adjust for confounding variables, thus allowing matching of T-TKA to M-TKA in a 1:1 ratio.

resultsBoth groups showed a significant improvement in all measured variables at 6 month and 2 years (p < 0.001) when compared to baseline. There was no significant difference in KSKS, KSFS, OKS, SF-36 and Patellofemoral joint-related OKS subscores (3, 5, 7, 12) between the two groups (n.s.). At 2 years, there were high satisfaction rates of 89.2% and 92.2% in the T-TKA and M-TKA groups, respectively (n.s.). Similarly, both groups demonstrated high expectation fulfilment rates of 84.6% and 90.6% for the T-TKA and M-TKA groups, respectively (n.s.).

conclusionUsing an extensive battery of standardized patient-reported, health-related quality of life and MCID assessments, our study demonstrated no difference in clinical outcomes between M-TKA and T-TKA that would justify the use of the newer and costlier M-TKA. Longer follow-up is necessary to evaluate the possible advantages of this new implant design. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective Study.