Greater Satisfaction in Older Patients With a Mobile-Bearing Compared With Fixed-Bearing Total Knee Arthroplasty

Lizaur-Utrilla, Alejandro; Sanz-Reig, J.; Trigueros-Rentero, Maria A.

doi:10.1016/j.arth.2011.05.021

Cited by 19 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reparatrice Appar. Mot 85.2 FB 48 69.8 29.9 77 MB 44 72 29.6 60 Lizaur-Utrilla et al, 2012 [ 70 ] J Arthroplasty 24 MB 61 74.6 31.3 77 FB 58 73.9 32.6 81 Mahoney et al, 2012 [ 72 ] Clin Orthop Relat Res 24 MB 178 66 31.0 67 FB 183 66 31.0 61 Marques et al, 2014 [ 75 ] Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 48 FB 45 68.9 28.7 75 MB 42 69.4 30.4 70 Matsuda et al, 2010 [ 76 ] Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 70.8 FB 31 76 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

No difference between mobile and fixed bearing in primary total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis

Migliorini

Maffulli

Cuozzo

et al. 2022

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Both mobile (MB) and fixed (FB) bearing implants are routinely used for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This meta-analysis compared MB versus FB for TKA in terms of implant positioning, joint function, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), and complications. It was hypothesised that MB performs better than FB implants in primary TKA. Methods This meta-analysis was conducted according to the 2020 PRISMA statement. In February 2022, the following databases were accessed: Pubmed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Embase. All the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing mobile versus fixed bearing for primary TKA were considered. Results Data from 74 RCTs (11,116 procedures) were retrieved. The mean follow-up was 58.8 (7.5 to 315.6) months. The MB group demonstrated greater range of motion (ROM) (P = 0.02), Knee Society Score (KSS) score (P < 0.0001), and rate of deep infections (P = 0.02). No difference was found in implant positioning: tibial slope, delta angle, alpha femoral component angle, gamma femoral component angle, beta tibial component angle, tibiofemoral alignment angle, posterior condylar offset, radiolucent lines. No difference was found in duration of the surgical procedure. No difference was found in the following PROMs: Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), visual analogue scale (VAS), function and pain subscales of the KSS score. No difference was found in the rate of anterior knee pain, revision, aseptic loosening, fractures, and deep vein thrombosis. Conclusion There is no evidence in support that MB implants promote greater outcomes compared to FB implants in primary TKA. Level of evidence Level I.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

No difference between mobile and fixed bearing in primary total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis

Migliorini

Maffulli

Cuozzo

et al. 2022

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, there were only 50 knees in this study, which reflects the relative rarity of Ranawat type-II valgus arthritic knees with marked coronal femoral bowing deformities in patients undergoing TKA. One study [ 44 ], using the IKS scoring system to calculate a sample size with a power of 80 % and a significance of 0.05 to detect a difference of 5 points in the IKS score (estimated SD of 8), found that 33 knees were required per group. With only 22 cases of CAS-TKA, our study was too underpowered to show significant differences with Bone-Resect-TKA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Total knee arthroplasty in patients with Ranawat type-II valgus arthritic knee with a marked coronal femoral bowing deformity: comparison between computer-assisted surgery and intra-articular resection

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundProper limb and component alignments as well as soft tissue balance are vital for the longevity and optimal long-term outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This procedure is technically demanding in patients with Ranawat type-II valgus arthritic knees with marked coronal femoral bowing. Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) and intra-articular bone resection with TKA are the treatments of choice for patients with ipsilateral extra-articular deformity. In theory, both CAS and intra-articular bone resection are beneficial in Ranawat type-II valgus arthritic knees with marked coronal femoral bowing deformity, but the literature on this topic is sparse. We compared the benefits of using these two techniques for TKA under this circumstance.MethodsPatients who had Ranawat type-II valgus arthritic knees and marked coronal femoral bowing deformity and had undergone TKA at our hospital between 2005 and 2013 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Patients treated with CAS were assigned to the CAS-TKA group; patients treated with intra-articular bone resection were assigned to the Bone-Resect-TKA group. Radiographic parameters and clinical outcomes (International Knee Society (IKS) scores and patellar scores) in both groups were compared.ResultsForty-seven patients (50 knees) met the inclusion criteria: 22 knees in the CAS-TKA group and 28 knees in the Bone-Resect-TKA group. Lateral retinaculum release was significantly (P = 0.008) higher in the Bone-Resect-TKA group. The joint-line was significantly properly restored in the CAS-TKA group (P = 0.011). The reconstructed mechanical axis was significantly (P = 0.012) closer to normal in the CAS-TKA group than in the Bone-Resect-TKA group. For component alignment, the femoral valgus and femoral flexion angles were significantly better in the CAS-TKA group (P = 0.002 and P = 0.006, respectively), but not the tibial valgus, tibial flexion, or patellar tilting angles. IKS scores and patellar scores were not significantly different between groups at a mean follow-up of 60.2 months.ConclusionsCAS-TKA was effective for obtaining proper alignment and joint-line restoration in patients with Ranawat type-II valgus arthritic knees and marked coronal femoral bowing deformity, but not for yielding better clinical outcomes. Additional large-scale prospective randomized cohort studies with long-term follow-ups are necessary to make evidence-based recommendations.

show abstract

“…The MB implant offers greater conformity and decreased contact stresses through a polyethylene liner that is mobile in relation to the tibial tray 3 . MB prostheses are designed to provide more conforming surface shapes with reduced polyethylene contact stresses, reduce wear, minimize tibial loosening, and improve the ROM, especially in young and active patients 16 . Several in vitro studies have shown that MB prostheses do reduce polyethylene contact stresses and polyethylene wear [1][2][3]17 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Functional Performance after Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Rotating Platform and Fixed‐bearing Prostheses with or without Patellar Resurfacing

Chen

Tan

Al-Aidaros

et al. 2013

Orthopaedic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Greater Satisfaction in Older Patients With a Mobile-Bearing Compared With Fixed-Bearing Total Knee Arthroplasty

Cited by 19 publications

References 25 publications

No difference between mobile and fixed bearing in primary total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis

No difference between mobile and fixed bearing in primary total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis

Total knee arthroplasty in patients with Ranawat type-II valgus arthritic knee with a marked coronal femoral bowing deformity: comparison between computer-assisted surgery and intra-articular resection

Comparison of Functional Performance after Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Rotating Platform and Fixed‐bearing Prostheses with or without Patellar Resurfacing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About