Is there reduced polyethylene wear and longer survival when using a mobile-bearing design in total knee replacement?

Minimum twenty-year follow-up of fixed-vs mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty: Double blinded randomized trial

Introduction

Mobile-bearing (MB) inserts, designed to minimize aseptic loosening and to reduce contact stresses leading to polyethylene wear, are an alternative to fixed-bearing (FB) inserts. Most studies have shown no significant difference between MB and FB constructs, and there is limited long-term data comparing the two constructs [1,2,3,4]. The purpose of this study was to report the outcomes of a randomized controlled trial comparing MB versus FB inserts on patients with minimum 20-year follow-up.

Methods

Between 2002 and 2003, 132 patients were randomized intra-operatively to the rotating-platform (RP) prosthesis group or the FB prosthesis group. 40 patients from the previous minimum 12-year follow-up were evaluated to obtain information on implant survival and satisfaction. Basic univariate statistics were used.

Results

26 patients were deceased, and 4 patients were lost to follow-up. This left 10 remaining knees (FB = 5, RP = 5) for inclusion. The mean age at surgery was 56.8 years, and the mean follow-up was 21 years overall for both groups. There were four failures and two revisions in total for each group 12. The RP revisions were for patellar component loosening and deep infections. The revisions on FB knees were for patella fracture and dislocation, pain from an oversized femoral component, and a loose tibial baseplate. The remaining patients expressed satisfaction with their replaced knees. No additional revisions were reported in this follow-up study. With the numbers available for study, there was no difference in ROM at 122° ± 12.5° for RP knees and 119° ± 6.5° for FB knees (p = 0.92).

Conclusions

There were few revisions, and most patients, in both RP and FB groups, expressed satisfaction and limited wear with their knees. While a safe, viable option for TKA, RP inserts did not result in long-term clinical benefit compared to FB.

No significant clinical and radiological differences between fixed versus mobile bearing total knee replacement using the same semi-constrained implant type: a randomized controlled trial with mean 10 years follow-up

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the long-term clinical and radiological results between fixed (FB) and mobile bearing (MB) implants with identical design from the same manufacturer.

METHODS

From March 2007 to May 2009, we recruited 160 patients in a prospective, single centered, randomized controlled trial. The authors compared 81 FB total knee arthroplasty (TKA) versus 79 MB with medial compartment osteoarthritis. The same posterior stabilized HLS Noetos knee prosthesis (CORIN) was used in all patients. The two groups only differed by the tibial insert (fixed or mobile). The authors compared the postoperative Knee Society Score (KSS), the passive clinical and active radiological knee flexion, the implant survivorship, the complications, and the presence of radiolucent lines.

RESULTS

At mean 10.5 years' follow-up (range 8-12.1 years) no significant differences were found in clinical scores (KSS (p = 0.54), pain score (p = 0.77), stair climbing (p = 0.44), passive maximum flexion (p = 0.5)) or for radiological analyses (maximum active radiological flexion (p = 0.06), presence of progressive radiolucent lines (5 (MB group) versus 6 (FB group); p = 0.75)) between groups. No significant difference was found in overall implant survivorship (82% (MB group) versus 78% (FB group) p = 0.58) or complication rate (p = 0.32) at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

No significant clinical and radiological differences were found between fixed and mobile bearing TKA using the same semi-constrained implant type with comparable overall survivorship. The choice between a fixed or mobile bearing implant should be based on surgeon preference and experience with the selected implant.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prospective randomized controlled trial, Level II.

Mobile Bearing versus Fixed Bearing for Total Knee Arthroplasty: Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials at Minimum 10-Year Follow-up

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes between mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty (MB-TKA) and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty (FB-TKA) at a minimum 10-year follow-up. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched. All included articles were evaluated by two trained reviewers according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook for potential risk, and the Consolidated Standards on Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist and scoring system was also used to assess the methodological quality of each study. The extracted data included function scores, range of motion (ROM) of the knee, incidence of adverse events or revision, survivorship analysis, and radiographic outcomes. Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this meta-analysis, and all RCTs had a follow-up period longer than 10 years. This meta-analysis shows no significant difference between the two groups with respect to the Keen Society Score (KSS; p = 0.38), KSS function score (p = 0.30), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC; p = 0.59), ROM (p = 0.71), radiolucent line (p = 0.45), femoral and tibial component positions in the coronal plane (p = 0.55 and 0.35, respectively), revision incidence (p = 0.77), and survivorship rates (p = 0.39). Meanwhile, it showed a slight difference between the two groups in the tibial component position in the sagittal plane (p = 0.003). According to this meta-analysis, the current best available evidence suggests no significant difference between the MB-TKA and FB-TKA groups with respect to the clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, revision, and survivorship at a minimum 10-year follow-up. This is a Level II, meta-analysis study.

Superior Mid- to Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Mobile-Bearing Total Knee Arthroplasty Compared to Fixed-Bearing: A Meta-Analysis Based on a Minimum of 5 Years of Study

As more patients undergo total knee arthroplasty (TKA) each year, and the average age of patients gets younger, the patients are generally more active requiring a greater physiological demand and increasing range of motion on the prosthesis than the previous patients. However, there is no consensus on the optimal TKA tibial bearing design. We performed this systematic review to compare the clinical differences between mobile and fixed bearing constructs used in contemporary TKA. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, identifying 515 total publications, including 17 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A meta-analysis was performed, while the quality and bias of the evidence were rated according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines and the Cochrane Database questionnaire. The meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Seventeen studies were included, with a total of 1505 knees receiving a mobile bearing TKA and 1550 knees receiving a fixed bearing TKA. The meta-analysis compared clinical outcomes between mobile bearing (MB)-TKA and fixed bearing (FB)-TKA using postoperative Knee Society Score, postoperative ROM, and survivorship and showed that there was a distinct difference in Knee Society Score between the mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing groups (overall standardized mean difference = 1.38; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50-2.25; p = 0.002; I2 = 60%). Patients treated with mobile-bearing prostheses were more likely to report good or excellent range of motion results (overall standardized mean difference = 2.06; 95% CI: 0.65-3.47; p = 0.004). No difference in implant survivorship or reoperation rate were identified. The fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing TKA designs are both capable of producing excellent long-term results with excellent clinical outcomes if properly implanted; however, the mobile-bearing TKA have superiority in mid- to long-term clinical results. Trial registration number for PROSPERO was CRD42019126402.

No difference in patellar position between mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty for medial osteoarthritis: a prospective randomized study

PURPOSE

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the treatment of choice for severe osteoarthritis of the knee. Many studies have been performed comparing mobile- and fixed-bearing designs; however, there are insufficient data regarding the patellar position in either system. This study aimed to compare the resultant patellar position with a mobile- versus a fixed-bearing TKA and the influence of both designs on clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective randomized study, between 2007 and 2009, 160 TKA patients were assessed; 79 received a mobile-bearing and 81 received a fixed-bearing implant, for medial compartment osteoarthritis. A posteriorly stabilized, HLS Noetos knee prosthesis (Tornier, Saint-Ismier, France) was used in all cases. The only difference between the groups was whether the tibial component incorporated a fixed or mobile bearing. The patella was resurfaced in all cases. The International Knee Society Score (KSS) and the patellar tilt and translation were compared post-operatively. Patellar translation and patellar tilt analyses were subdivided into two subgroups (< 5 mm vs > 5 mm and < 5° vs > 5°).

RESULTS

The KSS was not statistically different between the groups at a mean follow-up of 7.4 years (range 5-11 years). Patellar translation and patellar tilt were not statistically different between the groups. When considering the patellar translation subgroup analysis, a significantly increased risk of patellar translation, greater than 5 mm, was found in the mobile-bearing group compared to fixed-bearing group (OR = 2.3; p = 0.048) without generating any meaningful difference in clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The theoretical advantages of mobile-bearing implants compared to fixed-bearing implants were not demonstrated in this randomized study, at mid-term follow-up. In daily practice, the choice between mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing designs should be based on the experience and clinical judgment of the surgeon.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prospective randomized study, level I.

Minimum twelve-year follow-up of fixed- vs mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty: Double blinded randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with fixed-bearing (FB) implants have demonstrated impressive functional results and survival rates. Meanwhile, rotating-platform (RP) constructs have biomechanically shown to reduce polyethylene wear, lower the risk of component loosening, and better replicate anatomic knee motion. There is growing question of the clinical impact these design changes have long-term.Questions/purposes: The aim of this double-blinded prospective randomized trial was to compare function and implant survival in patients who received either FB or RP press-fit condylar Sigma (PFC Sigma, DePuy, Warsaw, IN) total knee replacements at a minimum follow-up of twelve years.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patient reported outcome measures used included the functional Knee Society Score, Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, Medical Outcomes Short Form-36 (SF-36) score, and satisfaction assessment on a four-point Likert scale. The data was collected from times preoperative, two-years, and final encounter (mean 13.95 years). A total of 28 RP and 19 FB knees (58.8%) were analyzed at the final follow-up.

RESULTS

Among all patients, KSS and WOMAC scores statistically improved from pre-op to 2-year, while KSS statistically worsened from 2-year to final follow-up. The RP group averaged better follow-up scores in all assessments at the final follow-up with exception of overall satisfaction. There was no statistically significant difference in the functional Knee Society Score, Short Form-36, WOMAC scores, patient satisfaction or implant survival between the two groups at any measured period.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a fixed-bearing or rotating-platform design does not convey significant superiority in terms of function or implant longevity at a minimum twelve years after total knee arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, Experimental study, randomized controlled trial (RCT).

Enhanced patella tracking in rotating platform total knee replacements, friend or foe? A case of iliotibial band impingement by rotating polyethylene insert

Rotating platform total knee replacement implants have been marketed to allow more precise approximation of normal knee kinematics and enhance patella tracking. At liberty of rotation, the distinct mobile polyethylene insert design does have its pitfalls in spite of purported merits. We report a case of lateral knee pain following rotating platform total knee replacement, attributable to iliotibial band impingement by the rotating polyethylene insert. Prompt treatment via arthroscopic release circumvented a traumatic and costly revision procedure.

No Detectable Polyethylene Wear 15 Years After Implantation of a Mobile-Bearing Total Knee Arthroplasty With Electron Beam-Irradiated Polyethylene

BACKGROUND

The present study was designed to evaluate the risk of significant polyethylene (PE) wear 10 years or more after implantation of a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using electron beam-irradiated highly cross-linked PE component.

METHODS

All patients operated between 2001 and 2004 for implantation of this particular TKA in the two participating centers were eligible for this study. All patients were contacted after the 10-year follow-up for repeat clinical examination and radiological evaluation. The occurrence of a revision prior to the final evaluation and its reason were recorded. The thickness of the PE piece was measured on plain X-rays.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventy-eight TKAs were implanted during the study time-frame. One hundred sixteen patients deceased prior to the 10-year follow-up (20%). An additional 121 patients were lost to follow-up prior to the 10-year follow-up (21%). Complete follow-up at 10 years or more (including death or revision) was obtained for 448 cases (78%). Ten prosthetic revisions were performed for mechanical reasons during the follow-up time (2%). One single revision was performed because PE wear after 13 years. No significant PE wear was detected at the final radiographic evaluation for nonrevised cases. The 10-year survival rate for mechanical revision only was 98.0% and decreased to 96.2% at 15 years.

CONCLUSION

The use of electron beam-irradiated PE was associated with an extremely low incidence of wear. This technology may be considered as safe regarding PE behavior for TKA after more than 10 years. Further improvement of PE manufacturing may be not required.

Superior long-term survival for fixed bearing compared with mobile bearing in ligament-balanced total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

Only few long-term data on ligament-balanced cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty (CR TKA) are currently available. Either a mobile- or fixed-bearing insert can be chosen, which showed good mid-term outcome and few complications and revisions. This multi-centre retrospective cross-sectional cohort study investigated the 12-year results of primary TKA using a balancing gap technique and compared survival and clinical outcome between fixed and mobile inserts.

METHODS

In this retrospective cross-sectional cohort study, 557 cases of three clinics (2 Swiss, 1 Dutch) operated between 1998 and 2003 with the first series of a TKA implanted with a balanced gap technique (433 (77.7%) fixed, 124 (22.3%) mobile (anterior-posterior gliding (7-9 mm) and rotational (15°) degrees of freedom) inserts) were included for survival analysis (Kaplan-Meier, by insert type). At the 12-year follow-up (FU) examination of 189 cases, range of motion, knee society score (KSS), numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain and satisfaction were determined and radiographs were evaluated by median tests, by insert type.

RESULTS

Of 521 cases available for analysis, 28 (5.4%; 11 fixed, 17 mobile bearing) were revised. Mean cumulative survival after 12.4 years was 97.0% (95% CI 94.7-98.4) for fixed bearings and 85.4% (95% CI 77.5-90.7) after 12.2 years for mobile bearings, p < 0.0001. Patients' mean age at 11.0 years FU (n = 189) was 78.0 (range 54.5-97.3) years. Mean total KSS was 157.8 (24-200) points, and mean passive flexion was 114° (45-150); no clinical score differed significantly between fixed and mobile bearings.

CONCLUSION

This study showed a superior survival for fixed bearing compared with mobile bearing in a CR TKA using a ligament-balanced technique after more than 12 years. Clinical outcomes are excellent to good after long-term follow-up, and similar for fixed and mobile bearing.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic studies-retrospective cohort study, Level III.

Clinical Evaluation of Efficacy and Performance of All-Poly Tibial Freedom® Total Knee System for Treating Osteoarthritis Patients: Three-Year Follow Up Study

Introduction

Advancement in technology in terms of design and building materials has made Total Knee Replacement (TKR) a highly effective, safe, and predictable orthopedic procedure.

Aim

To review the clinical outcomes for efficacy and performance of Freedom Total Knee System for the management of Osteoarthritis (OA), at a minimum of three years follow up.

Materials and Methods

For this retrospective, post-marketing study, clinical data of patients treated with Freedom Total Knee System was retrieved from the clinical records after approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee . All the patients above the age of 18 years who completed at least three years after TKR were observed for the study purpose. Patients treated for OA were included while the patients who received the implant for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and traumatic injury were excluded. Factors such as aseptic loosening, implant failure, and need for revision surgery were observed to evaluate implant performance. Cases were recruited for clinical assessment of primary efficacy endpoint in terms of post-surgery maximun range of motion. Secondary efficacy endpoint was to determine the clinical and social quality of life as per the American Knee Society Score (AKSS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain and stiffness scores.

Results

A total of 158 patients who had 191 TKR were observed for performance. The mean age of the patients was 67.67 years; mean BMI was 28.97±3.33, and the group comprised of 43% men and 57% women. Telephonic follow up at three years of 158 patients identified that none of them required revision surgery or had aseptic loosening suggesting excellent performance. Final clinical follow up at three years was available for only 35 patients (41 knee implants). The range of motion significantly improved from preoperative 104°±5.67° (range, 85°-119°) to 119.8°±11.05° (98°-123°) at follow-up (p<0.05). There was a significant improvement in clinical and functional AKSS score and WOMAC score at follow-up.

Conclusion

The evaluation of Freedom Total Knee System for TKR in treating OA, at a minimum of three years follow up showed excellent outcomes in terms of performance, range of motion, reduced postoperative stiffness and pain, and improved functionality.

Comparison of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty after high tibial osteotomy

PURPOSE

There is no information comparing the results of fixed-bearing total knee replacement and mobile-bearing total knee replacement in the same patients previously treated by high tibial osteotomy. The purpose was therefore to compare fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee replacements in patients treated with previous high tibial osteotomy.

METHODS

We compared the results of 57 patients with osteoarthritis who had received a fixed-bearing prosthesis after high tibial osteotomy with the results of 41 matched patients who had received a rotating platform after high tibial osteotomy. The match was made for length of follow-up period. The mean follow-up was 17 years (range, 15-20 years). The patients were assessed clinically and radiographically.

RESULTS

The pre-operative knee scores had no statistically significant differences between the two groups. So was the case with the intra-operative releases, blood loss, thromboembolic complications and infection rates in either group. There was significant improvement in both groups of knees, and no significant difference was observed between the groups (i.e., fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing knees) for the mean Knee Society knee clinical score (95 and 92 points, respectively), or the Knee Society knee functional score (82 and 83 points, respectively) at the latest follow-up. However, the mean post-operative knee motion was higher for the fixed-bearing group (117° versus 110°). In the fixed-bearing group, one knee was revised because of periprosthetic fracture. In the rotating platform mobile-bearing group, one knee was revised because of aseptic loosening of the tibial component. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship for revision at ten years of follow-up was 95.2% for the fixed bearing prosthesis and 91.1% for the rotating platform mobile-bearing prosthesis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although we did manage to detect significant differences mainly in clinical and radiographic results between the two groups, we found no superiority or inferiority of the mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis over the fixed-bearing total knee prosthesis for patients previously operated by high tibial osteotomy.

No differences between fixed- and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

For years, numerous studies have been performed to determine whether mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty (MB-TKA) or fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty (FB-TKA) is the preferential design in total knee arthroplasty. Reviews and meta-analyses on this subject have focused on a relatively small number of randomised controlled trials, possibly missing important results of smaller studies. The goal of this review was to provide a comprehensive overview of all literature comparing MB-TKA and FB-TKA in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee.

METHODS

An extensive literature search was performed in the PubMed database. All studies that compared MB-TKA with FB-TKA and looked at one of four theorised advantages (insert wear, signs of loosening, survival rate of the prosthesis and clinical outcome) were included.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 258 articles, of which 127 were included after the first screening. The included studies consisted of 9 meta-analyses, 3 systematic reviews, 48 RCT's, 44 comparative studies, 10 reviews and 13 studies that examined patients who received bilateral TKA (one MB-TKA and one FB-TKA). Combining the results of all studies showed that almost all studies found no difference between MB-TKA and FB-TKA.

CONCLUSIONS

Even when examining all different types of studies on MB-TKA and FB-TKA, the results of this review showed no difference in insert wear, risk of loosening, survivorship or clinical outcome. In daily practice, the choice between MB-TKA and FB-TKA should be based on the experience and judgment of the surgeon, since no clear differences are observed in the scientific literature.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

P.F.C Sigma® cruciate retaining fixed-bearing versus mobile-bearing knee arthroplasty: a prospective comparative study with minimum 10-year follow-up

AIMS

To prospectively compare long-term clinical and radiological outcomes following a cruciate retaining fixed-bearing (FB) and a mobile-bearing (MB) primary total knee replacement (TKR).

METHODS

We prospectively reviewed 113 TKRs in 99 patients (14 bilateral) with a PFC sigma cruciate retaining rotating platform system, at an average follow-up of 11.1 years (range 10-12). Results were contrasted with those from 89 TKRs in 72 patients (17 bilateral) with a PFC sigma cruciate fixed-bearing prosthesis, at an average follow-up of 12.1 years (range 10-14.1). Outcomes collected included pre- and post-operative range of motion, Oxford Knee Scores, complications encountered, as well as radiographical assessments of polyethylene wear.

RESULTS

In the MB group, mean Oxford Knee Scores improved from 16 pre-operatively to 42 at final follow-up. The mean range of motion was 115° (75-130). In the FB group, mean Oxford Knee Scores improved from 16.2 pre-operatively to 42.5 at final follow-up. The mean range of motion was 111.2 (80-135) degrees at final follow-up.

CONCLUSION

We failed to elicit an objectively demonstrable clinical difference between the MB- and FB-implanted knees. Similarly, radiological benefits of the MB implants with regard to polyethylene wear were not evident at a minimum 10-year follow-up.

Higher forgotten joint score for fixed-bearing than for mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

To compare the postoperative subjective outcome for fixed- and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) by using the forgotten joint score (FJS-12), a new patient-reported outcome score of 12 questions evaluating the potential of a patient to forget about his operated joint. The hypothesis of this study was that a mobile-bearing TKA would have a higher level of forgotten joint than a fixed-bearing model of the same design.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 100 patients who underwent TKA at least 1 year [mean (SD) 18 (5) months] before with either a fixed-bearing (N = 50) or a mobile-bearing (N = 50) TKA from the same implant family. Clinical outcome was evaluated with the knee society score and patient-reported outcome with the forgotten joint score.

RESULTS

No difference was observed for demographics in between both study groups. The mean (SD) postoperative FJS-12 for the fixed-bearing TKA was 71 (28) compared to a mean (SD) of 56.5 (30) for the mobile-bearing TKA.

DISCUSSION

The clinical relevance of the present retrospective study is that it shows for the first time a significant difference between fixed- and mobile-bearing TKA by using a new patient-reported outcome score. The hypothesis that mobile-bearing TKA would have a higher degree of forgotten joint than a fixed-bearing TKA could not be confirmed. A level I prospective study should be set up to objectivise these findings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Comparison of Tibial Insert Polyethylene Damage in Rotating Hinge and Highly Constrained Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrieval Analysis

This study compared the damage scores and damage patterns in 19 tibial inserts from rotating hinge (RH) implants with 19 inserts from highly constrained (HC) implants. Each insert was divided into 16 damage zones and each zone was subjectively graded from a scale of 0-3 for seven different damage modes. The overall damage scores were comparable for the two groups (RH: 64.1 ± 15.4; HC: 66.1 ± 29.0; P = 0.59). The HC group, however, had greater post damage (compared to the post-hole of RH) while the RH group had greater backside damage. The pattern of damage was also different, with burnishing and cold flow being more common in HC group while pitting, scratching and embedded debris were more common in the RH group.

In vitro kinematics of fixed versus mobile bearing in unicondylar knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

When performing unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA), the surgeon can choose between two fundamentally different designs: a mobile-bearing (MB) inlay with high conformity, or a low-conformity, fixed bearing (FB) inlay. There is an ongoing debate in the orthopaedic community about which design is superior. To date, there have been no comparative biomechanical studies regarding each system's effects on the quadriceps force and the medial contact pressure. The purpose of this study was to investigate these alterations in vitro before and after UKA with two prosthesis systems, representing the MB and FB designs.

METHODS

FB and MB unicondylar knee prosthesis designs were tested in sequence under isokinetic extension in an in vitro simulator. In each case, the required quadriceps extension force was determined before and after implantation of a medial UKA. Furthermore, the tibiofemoral contact pressures were evaluated for both prosthesis designs.

RESULTS

The quadriceps force maximum was achieved at 106° and 104° of flexion with the FB and MB designs, respectively. Implantation of the FB UKA resulted in a significant increase in the necessary maximum quadriceps force (p = 0.006). In addition, implantation of the MB UKA resulted in a significantly higher extension force (p = 0.03). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant in deep flexion (p = 0.03), with higher forces in MB UKA.

CONCLUSION

The MB design showed significantly increased quadriceps extension force compared with the FB inlay in deep flexion. Although the FB design showed higher maximum peak pressures concentrated on a smaller area, the pressure introduction in deep flexion was lower, compared to MB inserts.

No differences in clinical outcomes between fixed- and mobile-bearing computer-assisted total knee arthroplasties and no correlations between navigation data and clinical scores

PURPOSE

The theoretical advantages of mobile-bearing (MB) designs over the conventional fixed bearings (FBs) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have not been proved yet through clinical studies. The aim of the study was to test whether the MB design has advantages in terms of better clinical outcomes when compared to FB. Furthermore, the relationships between intra-operative obtained implant positioning data and the clinical scores were analysed.

METHODS

A total of 99 patients were randomized into the FB or the MB group. All patients received the same posterior cruciate retaining implants and were operated with the use of a computer-assisted navigation system. The clinical outcomes of both groups were compared pre-operatively, at 1 year, and at a mean follow-up time of 4 years after surgery.

RESULTS

The MB implants showed no advantages over the FB when comparing the Knee Society Scores, the Oxford Score, the range of movement (ROM) and pain intensity of the patients in both groups at 1 and 4 years after surgery. There were no relationships between the computer navigation data and the clinical scores.

CONCLUSIONS

In view of the 4-year results, there is no evidence to support the recommendation of one design over the other in terms of better clinical outcome scores, higher ROM or lower pain rates. Long-term follow-up results may be necessary, including survival rates. Further research comparing different TKA designs should also include standardized performance-based tests.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prospective study (Randomized controlled trial with adequate statistical power to detect differences), Level I.

Bone loss following knee arthroplasty: potential treatment options

INTRODUCTION

The management of bone loss is a crucial aspect of the revision knee arthroplasty. Bone loss can hinder the correct positioning and alignment of the prosthetic components, and can prevent the achievement of a stable bone-implant interface. There is still controversy regarding the optimal management of knee periprosthetic bone loss, especially in large defects for which structural grafts, metal or tantalum augments, tantalum cones, porous metaphyseal sleeves, and special prostheses have been advocated. The aim of this review was to analyze all possible causes of bone loss and the most advanced strategies for managing bony deficiency within the knee joint reconstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Most significant and recent papers about the management of bone defects during revision knee arthroplasty were carefully analyzed and reviewed to report the most common causes of bone loss and the most effective strategies to manage them.

RESULTS

Modular metal and tantalum augmentation showed to provide more stable and durable knee revisions compared to allografts, limited by complications such as graft failure, fracture and resorption. Moreover, modular augmentation may considerably shorten operative times with a potential decrease of complications, above all infection which has been frequently associated to the use of allografts.

CONCLUSIONS

Modular augmentation may significantly reduce the need for allografting, whose complications appear to limit the long-term success of knee revisions.