Retrospective Cohort Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Orthop. Jul 18, 2025; 16(7): 106281
Published online Jul 18, 2025. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v16.i7.106281
Table 1 Patient demographics and reasons for revision of Truliant posterior stabilized compared to aggregate posterior stabilized, n (%)
Characteristic
Truliant PS (n = 1687)
Aggregate PS (n = 523234)
P value
Average age, years (SD)67.2 (9.7)67.3 (9.4)0.56
Average follow-up, months (SD)31.2 (16.5)56.5 (28.7)< 0.001
Sex0.51
    Male650 (38.5)205110 (39.3)
    Female1037 (61.5)316630 (60.7)
    Missing01494
Charlson index, mean (SD)2.57 (1.41)2.71 (1.47)< 0.001
Fallout due to patient death1 (0.06)3921 (0.75)0.001
Primary osteoarthritis diagnosis< 0.001
    Yes1517 (93.3)497650 (97.3)
    No109 (6.7)13942 (2.7)
Reason for revision
    All cause26 (1.54)10499 (2.0)0.17
    Mechanical complications3 (0.18)803 (0.15)0.80
    Mechanical loosening4 (0.24)1743 (0.33)0.49
    Instability4 (0.24)1152 (0.22)0.88
    Infection9 (0.53)2964 (0.57)0.86
    Periprosthetic fracture0 (0)171 (0.03)0.46
    Other fractures0 (0)424 (0.08)0.24
    Fracture or related sequelae0 (0)448 (0.09)0.23
    Articular surface wear0 (0)38 (0.01)0.73
    Pain0 (0)1175 (0.22)0.05
    Hematoma or wound complication0 (0)302 (0.06)0.32
    All other diagnoses6 (0.36)2921 (0.56)0.26