• Chae-Gwan Kong, Se-Wook Park, Hyo Yang, and Yong In.
• Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Catholic University of Korea, 222 Banpodaero, Seocho-Gu, Seoul, 137-701, Korea.
• Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014 Apr 1;134(4):571-6.

IntroductionThe Genesis II knee system incorporates 3° of external rotation into the femoral component and the femoral component is implanted in neutral rotation to the femur. The purpose of this study was to compare patellar tracking of the Genesis II knee system with that of the Vanguard knee system, in which the femoral component is routinely implanted in a 3° externally rotated position to the posterior condylar axis (PCA) of the femur.Materials And MethodsOne hundred consecutive knees scheduled to undergo total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were enrolled. Fifty knees underwent TKA with the posterior-stabilized (PS) Genesis II prosthesis and 50 knees underwent TKA with the PS Vanguard prosthesis. Rotation of the femoral component was calculated by measuring the acute angle between the transepicondylar axis (TEA) and the PCA on axial computed tomography (CT) images. The postoperative patellar tilt and displacement were compared between groups. The range of motion and Knee Society scores were also compared.ResultsForty-eight knees in each group were followed up for 2 years. There was no difference in the angle between the PCA and the TEA on postoperative CT scans between the two designs. There was also no difference in patellar tracking between groups. Both the Genesis II and Vanguard knee systems showed good clinical results at 2 years postoperatively.ConclusionThe patellar tracking of the Genesis II prosthesis was comparable to that of the Vanguard prosthesis.Level Of EvidenceProspective cohort study, Level II.

25 keywords...

hide…