Abstract
The Rotaglide+ knee arthroplasty was introduced in 2000 as a successor to the Nuffield and Rotaglide knees. Both prosthesis were used in our unit and data was collected prospectively on sex, diagnosis, range of motion, pain score and American knee association score (AKSS). All operations were done under the care of one Surgical team (BBM) using the same instrumentation and the same pathway. Between 1987 and 2000 444 primary Nuffield were performed. 278 primary Rotaglide+ knees between 2000 and 2006.
65% of Nuffields implanted were in female candidates and 55% in the Rotaglide+. 75% of Nuffields were performed for Osteoarthritis, 69% in the Rotaglide+, this reflects the authors growing interest in inflammatory arthritis. Pre-operative functional range of motion and pain scores were similar. Both series showed a significant and sustained improvement in pain score, and walking time. Similar improvement was seen in range of motion. Comparison of the two series showed the Nuffield knee scored better on AKSS at year’s one and two and on pain score at year one but other than this outcomes were similar for both series. Revision rate in the Nuffield series is 9% at 25 years and in the Rotaglide+ series 4% at 8 years. This compares favourably with other published knee series’.
Despite being introduced as an improved design the Rotaglide+ fails to demonstrate any improvement in function and pain compared to its predecessor the Nuffield knee. Knee surgeons need to maintain a healthy cynicism of manufacturers ‘improved’ implants.
Correspondence should be addressed to Editorial Secretary Mr ML Costa or Assistant Editorial Secretary Mr B.J. Ollivere at BOA, 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PE, England; Email: mattcosta@hotmail.com or ben@ollivere.co.uk
