Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Comparison of a novel porous titanium construct (Regenerex®) to a well proven porous coated tibial surface in cementless total knee arthroplasty - A prospective randomized RSA study with two-year follow-up

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Reliability of stress radiography in the assessment of coronal laxity following total knee arthroplasty

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Assessment of objective dynamic knee joint control in anterior cruciate ligament deficient and reconstructed individuals

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Knee extensor strength and hop test performance following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. A comparison of hamstring muscle activity during different screening tests for non-contact ACL injury

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

BACKGROUND: Regenerex is a novel porous titanium construct with a three-dimensional porous structure and biomechanical characteristics close to that of normal trabecular bone. The aim of this study was to compare this novel construct to a well-proven porous plasma sprayed tibial (PPS) implant after total knee arthroplasty.

METHODS: Sixty-one patients scheduled for an uncemented TKA were randomized to receive either a novel highly porous titanium construct Regenerex or the PPS tibial component. Radiostereometric analysis of the tibial components was performed postoperatively and at three, six, 12, and 24months with measurements of migration (segment motion and maximum total point motion (MTPM)).

RESULTS: Knee and function scores improved significantly from preoperatively to two-year follow-up. For both the Regenerex and the PPS the majority of migration appeared during the first three months and then stabilized. No statistically significant differences in MTPM were found in any follow-up between three and 24months. The Regenerex group had a lower migration rate between 12 and 24months compared with the PPS implants (p=0.03) but the PPS group had an initial significantly lower subsidence (p=0.04).

CONCLUSION: In conclusion the Regenerex implant could prove an effective scaffold material for coating of uncemented implants but did no better than the PPS component at 24months of follow-up. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01936415.

Original languageEnglish
JournalThe Knee
Volume23
Issue number6
Pages (from-to)1002-1011
ISSN0968-0160
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 18 Oct 2016

ID: 49190350