International Comparative Evaluation of Fixed-Bearing Non-Posterior-Stabilized and Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Replacements

Failure After Modern Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Study of 18,065 Knees

“…The majority of our TKAs used posterior stabilized implants and a measured resection technique with routine patellar resurfacing. Some data in the literature suggest that posterior stabilized designed TKAs have higher revision rates than cruciate retaining designs [16], while other data suggest no differences between these two common design types [17] [18].…”

Have the Causes of Revision for Total and Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasties Changed During the Past Two Decades?

“…There was also an increase in use of mobile bearing implants during Period 2, mainly the LCS 1 COMPLETE (DePuy). Mobile bearing implants have shown a higher revision rate in previous registry studies [12,30,48,49] and the LCS 1 COMPLETE had a higher revision rate in registry studies in Norway and Kaiser Permanente, especially resulting from aseptic loosening of the tibial component [29,55]. The increased use of the LCS 1 COMPLETE during Period 2 may explain the lack of improvement of aseptic loosening of the tibial component and also could affect the overall revision rate.…”

National and International Postmarket Research and Surveillance Implementation

“…In the final registry-based study of knee implants, by Comfort et al, fixed posterior-stabilized implants were compared with fixed non-posterior-stabilized implants (cruciateretaining) (http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00462) 21 . The study included 371,527 knee implants and found that posteriorstabilized devices were associated with a much higher risk of revision than non-posterior-stabilized devices when the patella was not resurfaced.…”