Dongsheng Hao1, Junjie Wang2. 1. Shanxi Bethune Hospital, Shanxi Academy of Medical Science, No. 99, Longcheng Street, Taiyuan, 030032, Shanxi Province, China. 13426364680@163.com. 2. Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The benefits and risks of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing designs for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were compared, and long-term functional, clinical and radiological outcomes were analysed. METHODS: A comprehensive search in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Central databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing designs with no less than 9 years of follow-up. Primary outcome measures were Knee Society Scores (KSSs), range of motion (ROM) in knee joint values, complication rates and revision rates. The final search was performed on 23 April 2021. RESULTS: Six RCTs were included. A total of 451 patients with 612 knees met the inclusion criteria. The mobile-bearing design, in contrast to the fixed-bearing design, can clearly increase the KSFSs, especially with posterior cruciate retention. There was no significant difference in the KSKSs, ROM values, revision rates or complication rates between the two bearing design groups. CONCLUSION: After approximately 10 years of follow-up, the mobile-bearing design has advantages in KSFSs over the fixed-bearing design. The mobile-bearing design may also have advantages in the revision rates over the fixed-bearing design when the posterior cruciate ligament is substituted. There may be no clear difference in KSKSs, ROM values or complication rates between these two designs.
BACKGROUND: The benefits and risks of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing designs for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were compared, and long-term functional, clinical and radiological outcomes were analysed. METHODS: A comprehensive search in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Central databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing designs with no less than 9 years of follow-up. Primary outcome measures were Knee Society Scores (KSSs), range of motion (ROM) in knee joint values, complication rates and revision rates. The final search was performed on 23 April 2021. RESULTS: Six RCTs were included. A total of 451 patients with 612 knees met the inclusion criteria. The mobile-bearing design, in contrast to the fixed-bearing design, can clearly increase the KSFSs, especially with posterior cruciate retention. There was no significant difference in the KSKSs, ROM values, revision rates or complication rates between the two bearing design groups. CONCLUSION: After approximately 10 years of follow-up, the mobile-bearing design has advantages in KSFSs over the fixed-bearing design. The mobile-bearing design may also have advantages in the revision rates over the fixed-bearing design when the posterior cruciate ligament is substituted. There may be no clear difference in KSKSs, ROM values or complication rates between these two designs.
Entities:
Keywords:
Fixed-bearing; Meta-analysis; Mobile-bearing; Randomized controlled trials; Total knee arthroplasty
Authors: J J Callaghan; J N Insall; A S Greenwald; D A Dennis; R D Komistek; D W Murray; R B Bourne; C H Rorabeck; L D Dorr Journal: Instr Course Lect Date: 2001
Authors: Koen T Van Hamersveld; Perla J Marang-Van De Mheen; Huub J L Van Der Heide; Henrica M J Van Der Linden-Van Der Zwaag; Edward R Valstar; Rob G H H Nelissen Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2018-02-16 Impact factor: 3.717
Authors: Kevin J Bozic; Steven M Kurtz; Edmund Lau; Kevin Ong; Vanessa Chiu; Thomas P Vail; Harry E Rubash; Daniel J Berry Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2009-06-25 Impact factor: 4.176