Skip to main content

Bicruciate-retaining versus cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty in implant fixation: a 10-year follow-up of a randomized RSA trial

In brief

Bicruciate-retaining knee matches stability yet has double revision rate

After ten years, tibial component migration was virtually identical between bicruciate-retaining and standard cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasties (about 0.9 mm vs 0.6 mm). Patient-reported scores were also similar, but the bicruciate group experienced two revisions while the cruciate group had none, suggesting higher complication risk despite comparable fixation.

Journal
Acta orthopaedica (Q1)
Published
17 September 2026
Study design
Randomized controlled trial
Evidence level
Level 1, High (CEBM 1b)
Authors
Tomofumi Kinoshita, Kristian R L Mortensen, Lina H Ingelsrud, Omar Muharemovic, Kirill Gromov, Anders Troelsen
PMID
42770474
DOI
10.2340/17453674.2026.46805

Why clinicians should know about it

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:  Bicruciate-retaining (BCR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) aims to restore physiological knee kinematics and joint stability by preserving both cruciate ligaments, potentially improving patient satisfaction. However, long-term clinical outcomes and tibial component migration remain insufficiently understood. We therefore aimed to evaluate long-term implant fixation and clinical outcome after BCR-TKA compared with cruciate-retaining (CR) TKA. METHODS:  We performed a long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial using radiostereometric analysis (RSA) to compare tibial implant migration between BCR-TKA and CR-TKA. The primary outcome was maximum total point motion (MTPM) of the tibial component, measured with model-based RSA at 3 months, 1, 2, 5, and 10 years. Secondary outcomes included the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) at identical time points. Mortality, reoperations, and revisions were recorded. RESULTS:  25 patients were included in each group. At 10 years, the estimated mean MTPM was 0.88 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-1.12) in the BCR group and 0.64 mm (CI 0.40-0.88) in the CR group (between-group difference -0.23 mm, CI -0.57 to 0.10). Estimated changes in OKS and FJS showed no evidence of differing longitudinal trajectories between groups. 2 revisions occurred in the BCR group, whereas none occurred in the CR group. CONCLUSION:  No significant differences were detected between BCR-TKA and CR-TKA in tibial implant migration or patient-reported outcomes over the 10-year follow-up. In contrast, the incidence of complications was higher in the BCR group, indicating that careful patient selection and optimization of surgical strategies remain important for BCR-TKA.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.

View on PubMedFull text at the publisherOpen in the app

For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.