Abstract
Background: There is no consensus regarding superiority between gap balancing (GB) and measured resection (MR) techniques to implant total knee arthroplasties. In a multicenter setup, we compared both techniques using the same prosthesis.
Methods: We included 262 balanSys posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasties from 4 centers: 3 using the MR (n = 162) and one using the GB technique (n = 100), without navigation.
Results: There was no significant difference in the Knee Society Score or visual analog scale pain at 2- and 7-year follow-up. The visual analog scale for satisfaction was significantly better in the MR group at 2 but not at 7 years. We found a significantly higher average valgus in the GB group, but the overall alignment was within 2° of neutral on the full-leg radiographs. There were no significant differences concerning radiolucency and survival.
Conclusions: We found no significant differences in the functional outcome, pain, alignment, or survival, but a tendency toward better function using MR and better survival with GB.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 835-844 |
Number of pages | 10 |
Journal | Arthroplasty today |
Volume | 6 |
Issue number | 4 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Dec 2020 |
Bibliographical note
© 2020 The Authors.Keywords
- Arthroplasty
- Gap balancing
- Knee Society Score
- Measured resection
- Survival
- TKA