Literature DB >> 36171340

Mobile bearing versus fixed bearing medial unicompartmental knee replacement: an independent two center matched-pairs analysis.

Mustafa Hariri1, Georg Hauer2, Maria Smolle2, Patrick Sadoghi2, Andreas Leithner2, Benjamin Panzram1, Christian Merle1, Tobias Renkawitz1, Tilman Walker3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the present study was to compare clinical outcome between patients following fixed-bearing (FB) or mobile-bearing (MB) unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) for antero-medial knee osteoarthrosis (OA) at two independent orthopedic centers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Matched-pairs were built between 35 patients receiving FB-UKR and 52 patients following MB-UKR regarding age at time of surgery, body mass index (BMI) and range of motion (ROM) preoperatively. Clinical and functional outcome was measured postoperatively by the American Knee Society Score (AKSS-O/AKSS-F), ROM, Tegner Activity Scale (TAS) as well as the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36).
RESULTS: The average treatment effect of the treated (ATT) after propensity score matching showed a significantly superior ROM in patients following MB-UKR (FB: 118°, MB: 124°). All remaining parameters had no statistically significant differences between both groups involving TAS, AKSS and SF-36.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that MB-UKR can provide a greater ROM compared to FB-UKR on comparable patients. The authors believe that both designs are suitable for adequate improvement of clinical outcome and ROM for patients suffering from antero-medial osteoarthrosis of the knee joint. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective cohort study, Level IV.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fixed-bearing; Knee arthroplasty; Mobile-bearing; UKR; Unicompartmental knee replacement

Year:  2022        PMID: 36171340     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-022-04629-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   2.928


  36 in total

1.  Cementless medial Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement. Five-year results from an independent series.

Authors:  Mamdouh H Hefny; Nick A Smith; Jon Waite
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2020-06-26       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 2.  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 3.  Is unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) superior to total knee arthroplasty (TKA)? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Alisara Arirachakaran; Pathompong Choowit; Chinundorn Putananon; Samart Muangsiri; Jatupon Kongtharvonskul
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2015-02-13

4.  Long-term survival is similar between closed-wedge high tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients with similar demographics.

Authors:  Sang Jun Song; Dae Kyung Bae; Kang Il Kim; Cheol Hee Park
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Mobile bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients whose lifestyles involve high degrees of knee flexion: A 10-14year follow-up study.

Authors:  Won Sik Choy; Kwang Won Lee; Ha Yong Kim; Kap Jung Kim; Young Sub Chun; Dae Suk Yang
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2017-05-30       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Does bearing design influence midterm survivorship of unicompartmental arthroplasty?

Authors:  John-Paul Whittaker; Douglas D R Naudie; James P McAuley; Richard W McCalden; Steven J MacDonald; Robert B Bourne
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Is recovery faster for mobile-bearing unicompartmental than total knee arthroplasty?

Authors:  Adolph V Lombardi; Keith R Berend; Christopher A Walter; Jorge Aziz-Jacobo; Nicholas A Cheney
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-02-19       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Adverse outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee replacement in 101,330 matched patients: a study of data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales.

Authors:  Alexander D Liddle; Andrew Judge; Hemant Pandit; David W Murray
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2014-10-18       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Mobile-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty restores limb alignment comparable to that of the unaffected contralateral limb.

Authors:  Arun B Mullaji; Siddharth Shah; Gautam M Shetty
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 3.717

10.  Ten-year clinical and radiographic results of 1000 cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacements.

Authors:  Hasan R Mohammad; James A Kennedy; Stephen J Mellon; Andrew Judge; Christopher A Dodd; David W Murray
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.