Clinical results of posterior cruciate ligament retaining TKA with alumina ceramic condylar prosthesis: comparison to Co–Cr alloy prosthesis

In a prospective study, 194 knees undergoing total knee arthroplasty (110 knees with alumina ceramic prostheses; 84 knees with Co–Cr alloy prostheses) were clinically and radiologically evaluated. Average follow-up period was 66 months (36–124 months). Average age at the time of surgery was 66 years. In the ceramic prostheses, two revision surgeries were performed because of breakage of the tibial tray and late infection, whereas two revisions of the Co–Cr alloy prostheses were carried out due to loosening and late infection. In the other patients, there were no significant differences in clinical parameters (HSS knee score and range of motion) between the two prostheses. In radiological evaluation, we could not find any radiolucent lines around the femoral ceramic component while radiolucency was present in three knees (3.6%) around the Co–Cr femoral component. Beneath the tibial tray, three knees (2.7%) showed a radiolucent line around the former prosthesis while eight knees (9.5%) demonstrated a radiolucent line around the latter prosthesis. Chi-square tests showed a significant difference in the occurrence of radiolucent line around both of the femoral and tibial prosthesis. This study demonstrated that clinical results of the alumina ceramic PCL retaining total knee prosthesis are comparable to the standard Co–Cr alloy PCL retaining total knee prosthesis. Although we could not draw any conclusions regarding the superiority of the ceramic prosthesis with respect to UHMWPE wear and long-term survivorship, this report encouraged a long-term follow-up study on ceramic prostheses.