Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
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
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
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
Do you wish to request the book?
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
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
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
2022
Overview
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.
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg,John Wiley & Sons, Inc,Springer Verlag
