Literature DB >> 21732024

No long-term difference between fixed and mobile medial unicompartmental arthroplasty.

Sebastien Parratte1, Vanessa Pauly, Jean-Manuel Aubaniac, Jean-Noel A Argenson.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Early studies in the literature reported relatively high early minor reintervention rate for the mobile-bearing unilateral knee arthroplasty (UKA) compared with short- and midterm survivorship after fixed- or mobile-bearing 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).
RESULTS: The mean Knee Society function and knee scores were comparable in the two groups. Radiographically, the number of overcorrections and the number of radiolucencies were statistically higher in the mobile-bearing group (69% versus 24%). At final followup, considering revision for any reason, 12 of 77 (15%) UKAs were revised (for aseptic loosening, dislocation, and arthritis progression) in the mobile-bearing group and 10 of 79 (12%) in the fixed-bearing group (for wear and arthritis progression).
CONCLUSIONS: This long-term study did not demonstrate any difference in survivorship between fixed and mobile-bearing but pointed out specific modes of failure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 21732024      PMCID: PMC3237998          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-011-1961-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  40 in total

1.  The routine of surgical management reduces failure after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  O Robertsson; K Knutson; S Lewold; L Lidgren
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2001-01

2.  In vivo determination of knee kinematics for subjects implanted with a unicompartmental arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jean-Noël A Argenson; Richard D Komistek; Jean-Manuel Aubaniac; Douglas A Dennis; Eric J Northcut; Dylan T Anderson; Serge Agostini
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  Fixed or mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacement? A comparative cohort study.

Authors:  R E Gleeson; R Evans; C E Ackroyd; J Webb; J H Newman
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.199

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

Authors:  N Confalonieri; A Manzotti; C Pullen
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  Mobile- versus fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Richard D Scott
Journal:  Instr Course Lect       Date:  2010

6.  Modern unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with cement: a three to ten-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Jean-Noël A Argenson; Yamina Chevrol-Benkeddache; Jean-Manuel Aubaniac
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation.

Authors:  S Ahlbäck
Journal:  Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh)       Date:  1968

8.  Comparison of a mobile with a fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee implant.

Authors:  Roger H Emerson; Thomas Hansborough; Richard D Reitman; Wolfgang Rosenfeldt; Linda L Higgins
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  In vivo kinematics for subjects with and without an anterior cruciate ligament.

Authors:  Richard D Komistek; Jerome Allain; Dylan T Anderson; Douglas A Dennis; Daniel Goutallier
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the Miller-Galante prosthesis.

Authors:  Douglas Naudie; Jeff Guerin; David A Parker; Robert B Bourne; Cecil H Rorabeck
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.284

View more
  27 in total

1.  Early migration of the cemented tibial component of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a radiostereometry study.

Authors:  Andrea Ensini; Paolo Barbadoro; Alberto Leardini; Fabio Catani; Sandro Giannini
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-06-04       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Unicompartmental arthritis in the aging athlete: osteotomy and beyond.

Authors:  Stephen F Johnstone; Michael J Tranovich; Dharmesh Vyas; Vonda J Wright
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2013-09

Review 3.  Larger range of motion and increased return to activity, but higher revision rates following unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty in patients under 65: a systematic review.

Authors:  Laura J Kleeblad; Jelle P van der List; Hendrik A Zuiderbaan; Andrew D Pearle
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-11-28       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 4.  [Recommendations for unicondylar knee replacement in the course of time : A current inventory].

Authors:  J Beckmann; M T Hirschmann; G Matziolis; J Holz; R V Eisenhart-Rothe; C Becher
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 5.  Fixed- versus mobile-bearing UKA: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Geert Peersman; Bart Stuyts; Tom Vandenlangenbergh; Philippe Cartier; Peter Fennema
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Comparison of implant position and joint awareness between fixed- and mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a minimum of five year follow-up study.

Authors:  Man Soo Kim; In Jun Koh; Chul Kyu Kim; Keun Young Choi; Jong Won Baek; Yong In
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 7.  Medial Unicompartmental Osteoarthritis (MUO) of the Knee: Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (UKR) or Total Knee Replacement (TKR).

Authors:  E Carlos Rodriguez-Merchan
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2014-09-15

8.  [Fixed bearing unicondylar arthroplasty in medial osteoarthritis of the knee].

Authors:  R Becker; C Paech; A Denecke
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2017-02-03       Impact factor: 1.154

Review 9.  Fixed- versus mobile-bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: are failure modes different?

Authors:  Tao Cheng; Daoyun Chen; Chen Zhu; Xiaoyun Pan; Xin Mao; Yongyuan Guo; Xianlong Zhang
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Results with nine years mean follow up on one hundred and three KAPS® uni knee arthroplasties: eighty six medial and seventeen lateral.

Authors:  Dominique Saragaglia; Adrien Bevand; Ramsay Refaie; Brice Rubens-Duval; Régis Pailhé
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-12-17       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.