Comparison of a mobile with a fixed tibial bearing unicompartimental knee prosthesis: a prospective randomized trial using a dedicated outcome score

Confalonieri, Norberto; Manzotti, Alfonso; Pullen, Chris

doi:10.1016/j.knee.2004.01.003

Cited by 72 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite these limitations, we report a comparative study of two comparable groups of patients with a long-term followup operated on in the same department by the two senior authors. The Knee Society scores [18] were comparable in the two groups and comparable with the function scores reported in the literature with excellent pain relief in the treatment of the medial compartment arthritis (Table 5) [7,9,11,25,38,41]. In vivo kinematic studies suggest patients implanted with fixed-bearing UKA have kinematics close to the normal knee despite some cases of paradoxical anterior translation seen over time [3].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

“…All but one of the previous comparative studies between fixed and mobile studies in the literature did not compare the rate of radiolucencies [7,9,11,25,38,41]. Li et al [25] in a prospective comparative randomized study did find a higher rate of radiolucencies in the fixed-bearing group at 2 years with comparable clinical scores and survivorship and no longer followup [25].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Earlier studies comparing the reintervention rate [8] and the short-and midterm survivorship [9,11,41] after fixed-or mobilebearing UKA suggested a higher early minor reintervention rate for the mobile-bearing UKA [8]. However, whether the long-term function and survivorship are similar is unclear.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

No Long-term Difference Between Fixed and Mobile Medial Unicompartmental Arthroplasty

Parratte

Pauly

Aubaniac

et al. 2012

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Early studies in the literature reported relatively high early minor reintervention rate for the mobilebearing unilateral knee arthroplasty (UKA) compared with short-and midterm survivorship after fixed-or mobilebearing UKA. However, whether the long-term function and survivorship are similar is unclear. Questions/purposes We therefore asked whether (1) mobile-or fixed-bearing UKAs have comparable function (as measured by the Knee Society scores); (2) mobile-and fixed-bearing UKA have comparable Knee Society radiographic scores; and (3) the long-term survivorship is comparable. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 75 patients (79 knees) with a fixed-bearing UKA and 72 patients (77 knees) with a mobile-bearing UKA operated on between 1989 and 1992. Mean age of the patients was 63 years; gender and body mass index (26 kg/m 2 ) were comparable in the two groups. We obtained Knee Society function and radiographic scores and determined survival. The minimum followup was 15 years (mean, 17.2 ± 4.8 years; range, 15-21.2 years).

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

No Long-term Difference Between Fixed and Mobile Medial Unicompartmental Arthroplasty

Parratte

Pauly

Aubaniac

et al. 2012

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the latest follow-up, the clinical outcome was evaluated using both the Knee Society Score and a dedicated UKR score developed by the Italian Orthopaedic UKR Users Group (GIUM) [5]. The GIUM score is based on a sum of positive and negative values and indicates normal, almost normal, abnormal and poor results.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unicompartmental versus computer-assisted total knee replacement for medial compartment knee arthritis: a matched paired study

Manzotti¹,

Confalonieri²,

Pullen

2006

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients older than 60 with unicompartmental knee arthritis can be treated with total or unicompartmental knee replacement. The aim of this study was to compare the results of matched paired groups of patients with isolated medial compartment knee arthritis replaced with either UKR (group A) or computer-assisted TKR (group B). The results included 68 knees at a minimum follow-up of 3 years. All patients had a varus deformity no greater than 8º and a BMI lower than 30. Patients were matched in terms of preoperative arthritis severity, age, gender and preoperative range of motion. In the computer-assisted TKR group, all the implants were positioned within 4º of the correct hip-knee-ankle angle and frontal tibial component angle. The surgical time and hospital stay were statistically longer in the CA TKR group. During the study no implant required revision. The results showed higher scores for a UKR in the treatment of isolated primary unicompartmental knee arthritis in patients older than 60 compared to a computer-assisted TKR. In this study a computer-assisted alignment system for TKR with optimal implant positioning did not produce equivalent clinical results compared to a UKR, but did increase the financial costs.Résumé Les patients âgés de plus de 60 ans, présentant une arthrose unicompartimentale du genou ont été traités soit par une prothèse totale, soit par une prothèse unicompartimentale. Le but de cette étude est de comparer les résultats de patients présentant une arthrose fémoro tibiale interne traités par une prothèse unicompartimentale (groupe A), ou par prothèse totale du genou mise en place par chirurgie assistée par ordinateur (groupe B). Les résultats incluent 68 genoux avec un suivi minimum de 3 ans. Tous les patients avaient une déformation en varus inferiure à 8 degrés et un BMI inférieur à 30. Les patients ont été comparés en fonction du degré d'arthrose, de l'âge, du sexe et de la mobilité pré opératoire. Dans la série prothèse totale, tous les implants ont été positionnés avec une marge de 4°par rapport à l'angle hanche cheville. Le temps opératoire et la durée d'hospitalisation ont été statistiquement plus importants dans le groupe prothèse totale. Aucun implant n'a nécessité de révision. Les résultats montrent que le score est bien meilleur dans les prothèses unicompartimentales pour le traitement des arthroses unicompartimentales, chez ces patients âgés de plus de 60 ans, comparé au traitement par prothèse totale avec chirurgie assistée par ordinateur. Cette étude montre que la mise en place par chirurgie assistée par ordinateur d'une prothèse totale du genou avec un positionnement optimal des implants peut donner un résultat équivalent à celui des prothèses unicompartimentales mais augmente le coût financier du traitement. IntroductionRecent trends in knee reconstructive surgery have included less invasive surgical approaches along with preserving

show abstract

“…[7,8] Several retrospective and prospective studies have been performed comparing mobile versus fixed bearing components in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. [7,9,10,11] However, each component group was limited to approximately 20-50 participants. One meta-analysis has compared both designs, with pooled data from each bearing type, with no significant difference found in clinical outcome or complication rate between mobile and fixed bearing designs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobile Versus Fixed Bearing Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Series of 375 Patients

Murphy

Fraser²,

Mihalko³

2015

ReconRev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: We sought to compare outcomes, complications and survival between mobile and fixed bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) in a large multi-surgeon group.Methods: Medical records of patients who underwent a medial UKA were queried between March 2003 and August 2012. Variables investigated included final range of motion (ROM), type of complication, and overall survivorship.Results: 375 medial UKAs were analyzed (308 mobile bearing and 67 fixed bearing). Average time to follow-up was 47 months. Final ROM was comparable (mobile: 1-122°, fixed: 1-120°, p = 0.34). Complications occurred in 20/308 (6.6%) mobile bearing UKA and 5/67 (7.5%) fixed bearing UKA (p = 0.77). The most common complications in mobile bearing implants were progression of lateral compartment disease and component loosening. The complications in fixed bearing implants were arthrofibrosis and tibial plateau fracture. Overall survivorship differed, but not significantly (mobile: 94.8%, fixed: 96.9%, p = 0.44).Discussion: In this largest reported cohort series comparing mobile versus fixed bearing UKA, we found no significant difference in final clinical knee range of motion, rates of complications, and survivorship between the two bearing types.

show abstract

Comparison of a mobile with a fixed tibial bearing unicompartimental knee prosthesis: a prospective randomized trial using a dedicated outcome score

Cited by 72 publications

References 22 publications

No Long-term Difference Between Fixed and Mobile Medial Unicompartmental Arthroplasty

No Long-term Difference Between Fixed and Mobile Medial Unicompartmental Arthroplasty

Unicompartmental versus computer-assisted total knee replacement for medial compartment knee arthritis: a matched paired study

Mobile Versus Fixed Bearing Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Series of 375 Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About