Abstract
We compared the results of 146 patients who received an anatomic modular knee fixed-bearing total knee replacement (TKR) in one knee and a low contact stress rotating platform mobile-bearing TKR in the other. There were 138 women and eight men with a mean age of 69.8 years (42 to 80). The mean follow-up was 13.2 years (11.0 to 14.5). The patients were assessed clinically and radiologically using the rating systems of the Hospital for Special Surgery and the Knee Society at three months, six months, one year, and annually thereafter.
The assessment scores of both rating systems pre-operatively and at the final review did not show any statistically significant differences between the two designs of implant. In the anatomic modular knee group, one knee was revised because of aseptic loosening of the tibial component and one because of infection. In addition, three knees were revised because of wear of the polyethylene tibial bearing. In the low contact stress group, two knees were revised because of instability requiring exchange of the polyethylene insert and one because of infection.
The radiological analysis found no statistical difference in the incidence of radiolucent lines at the final review (Student’s t-test, p = 0.08), most of which occurred at tibial zone 1. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship for aseptic loosening of the anatomic modular knee and the low contact stress implants at 14.5 years was 99% and 100%, respectively, with a 95% confidence interval of 94% to 100% for both designs.
We found no evidence of the superiority of one design over the other at long-term follow-up.
