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 2 Patient demographics and reasons for revision of Truliant cruciate retaining compared to aggregate cruciate retaining, n (%)
Characteristic
Truliant CR (n = 653)
Aggregate CR (n = 537840)
P value
Age, years (SD)68 (9.1)67.3 (9.3)0.045
Average follow-up, months (SD)28.0 (13.4)52.4 (29.6)< 0.001
Sex0.12
    Male240 (36.8)213312 (39.7)
    Female413 (63.3)323421 (60.3)
    Missing01107
Charlson index, mean (SD)2.74 (1.37)2.68 (1.42)0.32
Fallout due to patient death1 (0.15)3419 (0.64)0.12
Primary osteoarthritis diagnosis< 0.001
    Yes561 (90.2)513415 (97.7)
    No61 (9.8)11846 (2.3)
Reason for revision
    All cause2 (0.31)6974 (1.3)0.025
    Mechanical complications0 (0)486 (0.09)0.44
    Mechanical loosening0 (0)878 (0.16)0.3
    Instability0 (0)855 (0.16)0.31
    Infection0 (0)2078 (0.39)0.11
    Periprosthetic fracture0 (0)60 (0.01)0.79
    Other fractures0 (0)217 (0.04)0.61
    Fracture or related sequelae0 (0)222 (0.04)0.6
    Articular surface wear0 (0)55 (0.01)0.8
    Pain0 (0)819 (0.15)0.32
    Hematoma or wound complication0 (0)179 (0.03)0.64
    All other diagnoses2 (0.31)2133 (0.4)0.71