Differences in long-term fixation between mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing knee prostheses at ten to 12 years' follow-up: A single-blinded randomised controlled radiostereometric trial.

Leiden University Medical Center, Department of Orthopaedics, P.O. Box 9600, Postzone J-11-S 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands.
The Bone & Joint Journal (Impact Factor: 2.8). 10/2012; 94B(10). DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.94B10.28858

ABSTRACT This single-blinded randomised controlled trial investigated whether one design of mobile-bearing (MB) total knee replacement (TKR) has any advantage over a fixed-bearing (FB) design on long-term fixation as measured by radiostereometry. The amount of wear underneath the mobile bearing was also evaluated. A series of 42 knees was randomised to MB or FB tibial components with appropriate polyethylene inserts and followed for between ten and 12 years, or until the death of the patient. The polyethylene in the MB group was superior in that it was gamma-irradiated in inert gas and was calcium-stearate free; the polyethylene in the FB group was gamma-irradiated in air and contained calcium stearate. In theory this should be advantageous to the wear rate of the MB group. At final follow-up the overall mean migration was 0.75 mm (sd 0.76) in the MB group and 0.66 mm (sd 0.4) in the FB group, with the FB group demonstrating more posterior tilt and the MB group more internal rotation. In the FB group there was one revision for aseptic loosening, but none in the MB group. There were no significant differences in clinical or radiological scores. For the MB group, the mean linear wear rate on the under-surface was 0.026 mm/year (sd 0.014). This was significantly smaller than the wear rate of 0.11 mm/year (sd 0.06) in the MB between femur and polyethylene (p < 0.001). Nevertheless, even in a best-case setting the mobile bearings of this TKR design had no apparent advantage in terms of fixation over the FB knee prosthesis at ten to 12 years. The wear underneath the mobile bearing was small and is unlikely to be clinically relevant.

1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Fixed bearing (FB) total knee replacement is a well established technique against which new techniques must be compared. Mobile bearing (MB) prostheses, in theory, reduce polyethylene wear but the literature is yet to provide evidence that they are superior in terms of function or long-term survivorship. In addition there has been no comparison of patella resurfacing on the outcome of either design. The aims of this randomised prospective study were firstly to determine whether a mobile bearing prosthesis produced better clinical outcome and range of motion at two year follow-up and secondly to assess the effect of patella resurfacing on the outcomes of both types of bearing design. Three hundred fifty-two patients were randomised into receiving either a PFC Sigma© cruciate sacrificing total knee arthroplasty either with a mobile bearing or a fixed bearing, with a sub-randomisation to either patella resurfacing or patella retention. All patients participated with standard clinical outcome measures and had their range of motion measured both pre-operatively and at follow-up. The mobile bearing TKR design had no impact on range of motion; Oxford Knee Score and American Knee Society knee and function scores when compared to its fixed bearing equivalent. At two year follow-up there was no difference between the PFC Sigma© fixed and mobile bearing designs. With no clinical difference between the cohorts, we cannot recommend one design over the other. Long term benefits, particularly with regards to polyethylene wear, may yet be demonstrated. Level of evidence - 1B.
    The Knee 10/2013; 21(1). DOI:10.1016/j.knee.2013.09.007 · 2.01 Impact Factor
  • Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 03/2014; 472(7). DOI:10.1007/s11999-014-3584-z · 2.79 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: It is hypothesized that mobile polyethylene bearings in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may confer benefits with regard to range of motion and have improved clinical outcome scores in comparison with an arthroplasty with a fixed-bearing design. Our study compares clinical outcomes between patients who undergo TKA with either a rotating platform or fixed bearing using a posterior cruciate-retaining design. Three hundred and thirty-one patients were randomized to receive either a rotating-platform (161 patients) or a fixed-bearing (170 patients) implant. All patients were assessed pre-operatively and at 1 and 2 years post-operatively using standard tools (range of movement, Oxford Knee Score, American Knee Society Score, SF12 and Patella Score). There was no difference in pre- to 2-year post-operative outcomes between the groups with regard to improvement in range of motion (10° ± 16 vs. 9° ± 15), improvement in Oxford Knee Score (-17.6 ± 9.9 vs. -19.1 ± 8.4), improvement in American Knee Society Score (49.5 ± 24.7 vs. 50.7 ± 21.0), function (23.6 ± 19.6 vs. 25.0 ± 22.5) and pain (34.9 ± 16.2 vs. 35.8 ± 14.1) subscores, improvement in SF12 Score (10.0 ± 16.3 vs. 12.3 ± 15.8) or improvement in Patella Score (9.7 ± 7.4 vs. 10.6 ± 7.1). No difference was demonstrated in clinical outcome between patients with a rotating-platform and fixed-bearing posterior cruciate-retaining TKA at 2-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.
    Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy 02/2014; DOI:10.1007/s00167-014-2877-9 · 2.68 Impact Factor


Available from
May 20, 2014