Early Experience With the Vanguard Complete Total Knee System: 2–7 Years of Follow-Up and Risk Factors for Revision

Abstract A cross-sectional study in two hospitals was performed on 807 patients with a primary Vanguard (Biomet) total knee Arthroplasty (TKA). The research questions addressed were (1) what are the two- and six year survival rates of the Vanguard, (2) what are the clinical outcome scores, (3) what...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	The Journal of arthroplasty 2014-02, Vol.29 (2), p.348-354
Main Authors:	Kievit, Arthur J., MD, Schafroth, Matthias U., MD, PhD, Blankevoort, Leendert, PhD, Sierevelt, Inger N., MSc, van Dijk, C. Niek, MD, PhD, van Geenen, Rutger C.I., MD, PhD
Format:	Article
Language:	eng
Subjects:	Aged Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - instrumentation Cross-Sectional Studies Female Follow-Up Studies Humans Knee Joint - surgery Knee Prosthesis Male Middle Aged Orthopedics Osteoarthritis, Knee - surgery Prosthesis Failure Reoperation Retrospective Studies Risk Factors
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	Abstract A cross-sectional study in two hospitals was performed on 807 patients with a primary Vanguard (Biomet) total knee Arthroplasty (TKA). The research questions addressed were (1) what are the two- and six year survival rates of the Vanguard, (2) what are the clinical outcome scores, (3) what are the findings at revision and (4) what are predictors for revision? The mean age at time of surgery was 67.0 (SD 10.0). The mean follow-up was 3.6 years (95% CI 3.56–3.73). At two years the survival was 97.2% for all-reasons (767 patients remaining) and 99%, for prosthesis-related-reasons (777 remaining). At six years this was 96.5% (40 remaining) and 98.6% (41 remaining). The mean clinical results (84% response on KOOS, Oxford and NRS) were good. A previous osteotomy was a risk factor for revision (hazard ratio 5.1, P = 0.001). This early experience with the Vanguard shows a good survival with no adverse outcomes related to the implant and therefore further use of the implant is justified.
ISSN:	0883-5403 1532-8406