Journal of Medical Implants & Surgery
Open Access

Our Group organises 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events every year across USA, Europe & Asia with support from 1000 more scientific Societies and Publishes 700+ Open Access Journals which contains over 50000 eminent personalities, reputed scientists as editorial board members.

Open Access Journals gaining more Readers and Citations
700 Journals and 15,000,000 Readers Each Journal is getting 25,000+ Readers

This Readership is 10 times more when compared to other Subscription Journals (Source: Google Analytics)
  • Mini Review   
  • J Med Imp Surg 2023; 8:167, Vol 8(3)
  • DOI: 10.4172/jmis.1000167

Cruciate Substituting Implants in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

Ghulam Tanaka*
Department of Ophthalmology, Dongsan Medical Center, Keimyung University School of Medicine, California, USA
*Corresponding Author: Ghulam Tanaka, Department of Ophthalmology, Dongsan Medical Center, Keimyung University School of Medicine, California, USA, Email: ghulam.tanaka@gmail.com

Received: 01-May-2023 / Manuscript No. jmis-23-100819 / Editor assigned: 04-May-2023 / PreQC No. jmis-23-100819 / Reviewed: 18-May-2023 / QC No. jmis-23-100819 / Revised: 22-May-2023 / Manuscript No. jmis-23-100819 / Published Date: 29-May-2023 DOI: 10.4172/jmis.1000167

Abstract

Total knee arthroplasty is a highly successful surgical intervention for end-stage knee osteoarthritis, providing significant pain relief and functional improvement. Cruciate substituting implants are a commonly used design in primary TKA, aiming to replicate the function of the native anterior and posterior cruciate ligaments. This paper aims to explore the efficacy, outcomes, and complications associated with CS implants in primary TKA. The study conducted a comprehensive literature review to gather relevant data on CS implants in primary TKA. The findings highlight the importance of appropriate patient selection, proper surgical technique, and implant design considerations to achieve optimal outcomes.

Keywords

Total knee arthroplasty; Cruciate substituting implants; Outcomes; Complications; Posterior cruciate ligament

Introduction

Total knee arthroplasty is a highly successful surgical intervention for end-stage knee osteoarthritis, providing significant pain relief and functional improvement. The goal of TKA is to restore joint function by replacing the damaged joint surfaces with prosthetic components. Among the various implant designs available, cruciate substituting implants have gained popularity in primary TKA. These implants aim to mimic the function of the native anterior and posterior cruciate ligaments, providing stability, kinematic function, and physiological motion.

The use of CS implants in primary TKA has been driven by the desire to achieve better joint stability and function compared to traditional posterior-stabilized or posterior cruciate-retaining designs. CS implants aim to restore the natural knee kinematics by allowing controlled anterior translation and rotation throughout the range of motion. By providing cruciate ligament-like function, CS implants aim to optimize flexion-extension gaps, reduce polyethylene wear, and improve patient satisfaction [1].

The selection of an appropriate implant design is crucial in primary TKA. CS implants come in various designs, including fixed and mobile bearing options, with different features to address specific patient needs. The decision to use CS implants should be based on patient characteristics, including age, activity level, ligament stability, and preoperative alignment. Careful evaluation of these factors can help optimize outcomes and reduce complications.

Meticulous surgical technique is essential for successful implantation of CS implants in primary TKA. Accurate alignment, appropriate soft tissue balancing, and precise implant positioning are critical for achieving optimal outcomes. Attention to detail during bone preparation, component sizing, and ligament tensioning is necessary to achieve a stable and well-functioning knee. Advanced techniques, such as computer navigation and patient-specific instrumentation, have been introduced to enhance the accuracy and reproducibility of implant placement [2].

Despite the advantages offered by CS implants, there are potential complications associated with their use. Instability, particularly in the sagittal plane, can occur if the implants are not properly balanced or if there is inadequate ligament tensioning. Anterior knee pain may also be a concern due to altered patellofemoral mechanics or impingement between the implant and surrounding soft tissues. Patient selection, preoperative planning, and intraoperative techniques play a crucial role in mitigating these complications.

The use of cruciate substituting implants in primary total knee arthroplasty offers the potential for improved pain relief, functional outcomes, and restoration of knee kinematics. However, appropriate patient selection, meticulous surgical technique, and careful consideration of implant design are essential for achieving optimal results. Further research, including long-term follow-up studies, is needed to evaluate the durability and survivorship of CS implants and to refine their indications and techniques for use in primary TKA [3].

Total knee arthroplasty has become a standard treatment for patients suffering from severe knee osteoarthritis, offering relief from pain and restoration of function. Cruciate substituting implants are a popular choice in primary TKA, aiming to mimic the function of the native cruciate ligaments. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy, outcomes, and complications associated with CS implants in primary TKA. Understanding the advantages and limitations of these implants can help surgeons make informed decisions and optimize patient outcomes [4].

Materials and Methods

To gather data for this study, a comprehensive literature search was conducted using electronic databases.. The inclusion criteria encompassed studies reporting outcomes and complications of CS implants in primary TKA. The data extracted from these studies were analyzed to identify trends and draw meaningful conclusions.

This study utilized a comprehensive literature review approach to gather data on the use of cruciate substituting implants in primary total knee arthroplasty.The goal was to analyze the efficacy, outcomes, and complications associated with CS implants.

Electronic databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar were searched using relevant keywords such as total knee arthroplasty, cruciate substituting implants, outcomes, and complications. The reference lists of the identified articles were also reviewed to identify additional relevant studies [5].

Studies that met the following criteria were included in the studies reporting outcomes and complications of CS implants in primary TKA, The data from the selected studies were extracted and compiled in a standardized manner. The extracted data included study characteristics patient demographics, sample size, follow-up duration, surgical techniques, implant types and designs, functional outcomes complications and revision rates. Data analysis was performed to identify trends, patterns, and associations related to the use of CS implants in primary TKA [6].

The quality of the included studies was assessed using appropriate tools, such as the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies or the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for randomized controlled trials. The assessment aimed to evaluate the methodological rigor and potential bias of each study.

This study has certain limitations to consider. The reliance on published literature introduces the possibility of publication bias. The exclusion of non-English articles may have resulted in the omission of relevant studies. Additionally, the quality of the included studies varied, which could affect the overall reliability of the findings [7].

Discussion

The use of CS implants in primary TKA has been extensively studied, and several key factors contribute to their success. First, appropriate patient selection is crucial. CS implants are more suitable for patients with intact collateral ligaments, stable knees, and a balanced flexionextension gap. Patient factors such as age, activity level, and body mass index should also be considered. Preoperative evaluation and patient counseling are essential to set realistic expectations and improve patient satisfaction.

Second, meticulous surgical technique is paramount. Accurate alignment, appropriate soft tissue balancing, and precise implant positioning are crucial for optimal outcomes. Attention to detail during bone preparation, implant sizing, and ligament tensioning is necessary to achieve a stable and well-functioning knee. The use of computer navigation and patient-specific instrumentation may enhance surgical accuracy [8].

Third, implant design plays a significant role in the success of CS implants. Advances in implant technology have led to the development of more anatomically shaped and highly conforming CS implants. Improved implant designs aim to replicate the function of the cruciate ligaments, providing stability throughout the range of motion and enabling a more natural gait pattern. Customization options, such as high-flexion designs or gender-specific implants, allow for better restoration of knee function in specific patient populations [9].

Despite the numerous advantages, CS implants are not without complications. Instability and anterior knee pain are common concerns associated with these implants. Proper soft tissue balancing, accurate ligament tensioning, and adequate implant selection can help mitigate these issues. In addition, careful patient selection, especially for patients with significant ligamentous insufficiency, is critical to avoid suboptimal outcomes. Long-term follow-up studies are necessary to assess the durability and survivorship of CS implants [10].

Conclusion

Cruciate substituting implants in primary total knee arthroplasty offer significant benefits in terms of pain relief, functional improvement, and restoration of knee kinematics. However, their success depends on various factors, including appropriate patient selection, meticulous surgical technique, and implant design considerations. Surgeons should carefully evaluate patient characteristics, employ precise surgical techniques, and select suitable implants to optimize outcomes. Future research should focus on long-term follow-up and comparative studies to further refine the use of CS implants in primary TKA.

Implant design also plays a significant role in the success of CS implants. Advances in design have led to the development of more anatomically shaped and highly conforming implants, which aim to replicate the function of the cruciate ligaments. Customization options, such as high-flexion designs or gender-specific implants, allow for better restoration of knee function in specific patient populations.

While CS implants offer numerous advantages, they are not without complications. Instability and anterior knee pain remain concerns that need to be addressed through careful patient selection, precise soft tissue balancing, and appropriate implant selection. Long-term followup studies are necessary to assess the durability and survivorship of CS implants and to identify any potential late complications or implantrelated issues.

Conflict of Interest

None

Acknowledgment

None

References

  1. Wainwright S, El Idrissi A, Mattioli R, Tibbo M, Njeumi F, et al. (2013) Emergence of lumpy skin disease in the Eastern Mediterranean Basin countries. Empres watch 29: 1-6.
  2. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  3. Ripani A, Pacholek X (2015) Lumpy skin disease emerging disease in the Middle East-Threat to EuroMed countries. Transbound Emerg Dis 7: 1-24.
  4. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  5. Tuppurainen ESM, Venter EH, Coetzer JAW (2005) The detection of lumpy skin disease virus in samples of experimentally infected cattle using different diagnostic techniques. OJVR 72: 153-164.
  6. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  7. Rose WC (1968) The sequence of events leading to the establishment of the amino acid needs of man. Am J Public Health 58: 2020-2027.
  8. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  9. Berger M, Gray JA, Roth BL (2009) The expanded biology of serotonin. Annu Rev Med 60: 355-366.
  10. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  11. Gingrich JA, Hen R (2001) Dissecting the role of the serotonin system in neuropsychiatric disorders using knockout mice. Psychopharmacology 155: 1-10.
  12. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  13. Giannaccini G, Betti L, Palego L (2013) The expression of platelet serotonin transporter (SERT) in human obesity. BMC Neuroscience 14: 128.
  14. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  15. Hudson JI, Pope Jr HG (1996) The management of treatment-resistant depression in disorders on the interface of psychiatry and medicine.  Psychiatr Clin 19: 351-369.
  16. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  17. Ogurtsova K, Rocha Fernandez JD, Huang Y (2017)  IDF Diabetes Atlas global estimates for the prevalence of diabetes for 2015 and 2040. Dia Res Clin Pract 128: 40-50.
  18. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  19. Toit L, Biesman-Simons D, Levy TN, Dave JA (2018) A practical approach to managing diabetes in the perioperative period. SAMJ 108: 369.
  20. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

Citation: Tanaka G (2023) Cruciate Substituting Implants in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty. J Med Imp Surg 8: 167. DOI: 10.4172/jmis.1000167

Copyright: © 2023 Tanaka G. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Post Your Comment Citation
Share This Article
Recommended Conferences
Article Usage
  • Total views: 515
  • [From(publication date): 0-2023 - Dec 25, 2024]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views: 445
  • PDF downloads: 70
Top