Abstract
The role of modular tibial implants in total knee replacement is not fully defined. We performed a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial using radiostereophotogrammetric analysis to compare the performance of an all-polyethylene tibia with a metal-backed cruciate-retaining condylar design, PFC-∑ total knee replacement for up to 24 months. There were 51 patients who were randomised into two treatment groups. There were 10 subsequent withdrawals, leaving 21 all-polyethylene and 20 metal-backed tibial implants. No patient was lost to follow-up. There were no significant demographic differences between the groups. At two years one metal-backed implant showed migration > 1 mm, but no polyethylene implant reached this level. There was a significant increase in the SF-12 and Oxford knee scores after operation in both groups.
In an uncomplicated primary total knee replacement the all-polyethylene PFC-∑ tibial prosthesis showed no statistical difference in migration from that of the metal-backed counterpart. There was no difference in the clinical results as assessed by the SF-12, the Oxford knee score, alignment or range of movement at 24 months, although these assessment measures were not statistically powered in this study.
