Differences between staged bilateral total knee replacement (TKR) and simultaneous bilateral TKR have been investigated, but few studies have investigated differences in the functional improvements resulting from these methods. Therefore, this study investigates the different functional improvements between staged bilateral total knee TKR and simultaneous bilateral TKR. Among 144 potential bilateral TKR patients who were included in this study, 93 (64.6%) patients selected unilateral TKR and 51 (35.4%) selected bilateral TKR. Functional improvements were assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster University osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) and the Medical Outcomes Trust Short Form-36 (SF-36), and patients were interviewed pre-operatively and after 6 months. A generalized equation was used to test for differences in functional improvements. After TKR, pain, stiffness, function and total WOMAC scores were significantly reduced in both groups, with mean changes from − 26.6 to − 41.4 and from − 27.5 to − 42.2.The mean health change of SF-36 scores, physical component and mental component scores changed to 45.2 ± 18.2, 74.0 ± 15.4 and 77.0 ± 9.6, respectively, in Group 1 and 47.1 ± 17.1, 74.0 ± 15.2 and 75.5 ± 12.1, respectively, in Group 2. Unilateral and simultaneous bilateral TKR produce similar functional improvements, although current work status may be a novel impact factor. No differences in functional improvements were identified between patients who selected unilateral versus bilateral TKR, indicating no recommendation for one procedure over the other.

A chronic inflammatory state is a prominent feature in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB) is a transcription factor that regulates the expression of genes involved in inflammation. Some genetic studies have demonstrated that the NF-κB genetic mutation could cause kidney injury and kidney disease progression. However, the association of a gene polymorphism in the transcription factor binding site of NF-κB with kidney disease is not clear. We used the Taiwan Biobank database, the University of California, Santa Cruz, reference genome, and a chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing database to find single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) at potential binding sites of NF-κB. In addition, we performed a case–control study and genotyped 847 patients with ESRD and 846 healthy controls at Tri-Service General Hospital from 2015 to 2016. Furthermore, we used the ChIP assay to identify the binding activity of different genotypes and used Luciferase reporter assay to examine the function of the rs9395890 polymorphism. The results of biometric screening in the databases revealed 15 SNPs with the potential binding site of NF-κB. Genotype distributions of rs9395890 were significantly different in ESRD cases and healthy controls (P = 0.049). The ChIP assay revealed an approximately 1.49-fold enrichment of NF-κB of the variant type TT when compared to that of the wild-type GG in rs9395890 (P = 0.027; TT = 3.20 ± 0.16, GT = 2.81 ± 0.20, GG = 1.71 ± 0.18). The luciferase reporter assay showed that the NF-κB binding site activity in T allele was slightly higher than that in G allele, though it is not significant. Our findings indicate that rs9395890 is associated with susceptibility to ESRD in Taiwan population.