Aims. We aimed to examine the long-term mechanical survivorship, describe the modes of all-cause failure, and identify risk factors for mechanical failure of all-polyethylene tibial components in endoprosthetic reconstruction. Methods. This is a retrospective database review of consecutive endoprosthetic reconstructions performed for oncological indications between 1980 and 2019. Patients with all-polyethylene tibial components were isolated and analyzed for revision for mechanical failure. Outcomes included survival of the all-polyethylene tibial component, revision surgery categorized according to the Henderson Failure Mode Classification, and complications and functional outcome, as assessed by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score at the final follow-up. Results. A total of 278 patients were identified with 289 all-polyethylene tibial components. Mechanical survival was 98.4%, 91.1%, and 85.2% at five, ten and 15 years, respectively. A total of 15 mechanical failures were identified at the final follow-up. Of the 13 all-polyethylene tibial components used for revision of a previous tibial component, five (38.5%) failed mechanically. Younger patients (< 18 years vs > 18 years; p = 0.005) and those used as revision components (p < 0.001) had significantly increased rates of failure. Multivariate logistic regression modelling showed revision status to be a positive risk factor for failure (odds ratio (OR) 19.498, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.598 to 82.676) and increasing age was a negative risk factor for failure (OR 0.927, 95% CI 0.872 to 0.987). Age-stratified risk analysis showed that age > 24 years was no longer a statistically significant risk factor for failure. The final mean MSTS score for all patients was 89% (8.5% to 100.0%). Conclusion. The long-term mechanical survivorship of all-polyethylene tibial components when used for tumour endoprostheses was excellent. Tumour surgeons should consider using these components for their durability and the secondary benefits of reduced cost and ease of removal and revision. However, caution should be taken when using all-polyethylene tibial components in the revision setting as a significantly higher rate of mechanical failure was seen in this group of patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J. 2020;102-B(2):170–176

Objectives. All Polyethylene Tibial components in Total Knee Arthroplasty have been in use for some years, studies showing equivalent results to Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) with metal-backed Tibial components at 10 years have shown no significant difference between the two on radiostereometric analysis and revision rates[1]. Post operative patient outcome data using standard metal-backed Tibial components is widely reported in the literature. This study is looking at patient outcomes following All-polyethylene tibial component TKA. We hypothesize that using standard patient outcome measures, an improvement comparable with that expected for metal-backed tibial component TKA will be shown with All-polyethylene tibial component TKA. Methods. Between August 2006 and August 2008, 229 all-polyethylene tibial component TKA were implanted at the elective orthopedic unit. The choice of implant was entirely dependent on surgeon's preference. Of the 229 patient's, 225 details were available for review, 27 did not wish to take part in the study and 1 patient died a year following surgery of an unrelated illness. The remaining 197 patients agreed to take part in the study. The patient's were contacted either in person or over the telephone and asked to completed questionnaires for standard knee scoring. These included: the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), the WOMAC Score and the SF-12 Score, both pre-operatively and post operatively. Results. All three Scoring systems used showed an overall improvement post-operatively, as would be reasonably be expected. The results for the OKS, WOMAC and SF-12 all showed an improvement comparable with that expected for metal-backed tibial component TKA. Conclusions. Total Knee Arthroplasty using an all-polyethylene tibial component has been shown with these early results to be a reasonable alternative to metal-backed options offering some advantages. [1,2]

We report the results of a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial assessing the radiosterophotogrametric analysis (RSA), clinical and radiological performance of a metal backed and an all-polyethylene tibial cruciate retaining, condylar design, PFC-TKA up to twenty four months. 65 patients were recruited, of which 41 patients were randomised. There were 20 metal backed and 21 all-polyethylene. None were lost to follow-up. There were no significant inter-group demographic differences. We found a significant increase in SF-12 and Oxford knee scores after surgery in both groups. No significant difference was found between the groups in the RSA, SF-12, Oxford Knee score, radiological alignment and range of movement at 6, 12 or 24 months. At 2 years one metal backed implant showed translational migration > 1mm. No all polyethylene implant migrated > 1mm. Further analysis identified possible progressive subsidence of the metal backed implants compared to all-polyethylene implants, although the magnitude of this difference was very small. We conclude that in the uncomplicated primary total knee arthroplasty, all polyethylene PFC-_ tibial prostheses had equivalent performance to the metal backed counterpart, using RSA as the primary assessment instrument at 24 months. We found no differences between the two designs as assessed by the secondary instruments: SF-12, Oxford knee score, alignment and range of movement at 24 months. Should half of all primary total knee replacements performed in the UK receive an all-polyethylene tibial implant, the estimated annual cost saving would be 21 million pounds per annum

Background and Purpose:. Modularity of the tibial component in total knee arthroplasties (TKA) has many surgical benefits. It also reduces inventory related expenses but increases implant cost. The resulting locking mechanism micromotion that leads to non-articular microwear and has been an accepted consequence of modularity. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the risk of revision (all-cause and aseptic) of a monoblock all-polyethylene tibial component compared to a fixed bearing modular tibial construct with the same articular geometry while adjusting for potential confounders in a community based sample of primary TKAs. In addition, younger and older patient specific risk of revision was evaluated. Method:. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a Total Joint Replacement Registry (TJRR) was conducted. All 27,657 primary TKAs enrolled between 2001 and 2010 performed for any diagnosis with the same implant from a single manufacturer were included in the study. Patient characteristics, as well as surgeon, hospital, procedure, and implant characteristics were compared by the main exposure of interest, i.e. the type of tibial prosthesis (monoblock all-polyethylene vs. metal-backed modular). The main endpoints of the study were all-cause and aseptic revisions only. Descriptive statistics and Cox-regression models were employed. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are provided. Results:. The cohort consisted of 2,306 (8.3%) monoblock all-polyethylene tibial component TKAs and 25,351 (91.7%) modular metal-backed components. No gender, diagnosis or diabetic status differences were noted between the monoblock and modular cohorts. Patients with monoblock tibias were older (71.8 vs. 68.1 yrs, p < 0.001) and had a lower body mass index (30.1 vs. 31.6 kg/m2, p < 0.001). The median follow up time of the cohort was 2.9 years (interquartile range 1.2–5.1 years), during which 22 (0.95%) monoblock arthroplasties and 550 (2.17%) modular arthroplasties were revised. The all-cause revision rate/100 years of follow-up for monoblock and modular cohorts was 0.30 and 0.65, respectively. Their aseptic revision rate/100 of follow-up was 0.18 and 0.35, respectively. In adjusted overall models, the risk of all-cause revision (HR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.33–0.78, p = 0.002) and aseptic revision (HR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.29–1.19, p = 0.139) was lower in the monoblock cohort compared to the modular cohort. In adjusted models of patients 65 years and older, the risk of all-cause revision is 0.59 (95% CI 0.35–0.99, p = 0.045) in the monoblock cohort compared to modular cohort. In adjusted models of patients younger than 65 years old, the risk of all-cause revision (HR = 0.26, 95% CI 0.10–0.72, p = 0.010) and aseptic revision (HR = 0.27, 95% CI 0.11–0.65, p = 0.003) were lower in the monoblock compared to the modular cohort. Conclusion:. For our entire cohort of 27,567 primary fixed bearing TKAs, monoblock all-polyethylene tibial components had a 49% lower risk of revision for all-causes and a 41% lower risk of aseptic revision when compared to modular metal-backed tibial constructs. For patients younger than 65 years old, the all-polyethylene component had a 74% lower risk of all-cause revision and a 73% lower risk of aseptic revisions when compared to modular tibial constructs

Introduction. The precise indications for tibial component metal backing and modularity remain controversial in routine primary total knee arthroplasty. This is particularly true in elderly patients where the perceived benefits of metal backing such as load redistribution and the reduction of polyethylene strain may be clinically less relevant. The cost implications for choosing a metal-backed design over an all-polyethylene design may exceed USD500 per primary knee arthroplasty case. Methods. A prospective randomised clinical trial was carried out at the QEII Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, to compare modular metal-backed versus an all-polyethylene tibial component. Outcome measures included clinical range of motion, radiographs, survivorship, Knee Society Clinical Rating System, WOMAC and SF-12. Results. 116 patients requesting primary knee arthroplasty were recruited and randomised between the Smith & Nephew Genesis I non-modular (57) and modular (59) tibial designs between September 1995 and August 1997. At 10 years clinical follow-up, 4 implant revisions or intention-to-revise decisions were recorded in the metal-tray/modular group of which 2 were for aseptic tibial component loosening. 2 implant revisions in the all-polyethylene non-modular group were recorded, neither of which were for tibial component loosening. At 5, 7 and 10 year review; the KSCRS, WOMAC and SF12 scores were similar in both groups. As most patients randomised were over seventy years of age, this impacted significantly on the numbers available for longer term review and data was analysed by comparing pre- and post-operative scores for individual patients. Conclusion. There was no difference in performance between the all-polyethylene tibial component and the metal-backed tibial component. The case for using the all-polyethylene tibia in elderly patients is justified on both clinical efficacy and cost-containment grounds

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

Background. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) overall is a very reliable, durable procedure. Biomechanical studies have suggested superior stress distribution in metal-backed tibial trays, however, these results have not been universally observed clinically. Currently, there is a paucity of information examining the survival and outcomes of all-polyethylene tibial components. Methods. We reviewed 31,939 patients undergoing a primary TKA over a 43-year period (1970–2013). There were 28,224 (88%) metal-backed and 3,715 (12%) all-polyethylene tibial components. The metal-backed and all-polyethylene groups had comparable demographics with respect to sex distribution (57% female for both), mean age (67 vs. 71 years), and mean BMI (31.6 vs. 31.1). Mean follow-up was 7 years (maximum 40 years). Results. The purpose of this investigation was to analyze the outcomes of all-polyethylene compared to metal-backed components in TKA and to determine: (1) is there a difference in overall survival? All-polyethylene tibial components had improved survivorship (P<0.0001) and metal-backed tibias were at increased risk of revision (HR 3.41, P<0.0001); (2) Does body mass index (BMI) or age have an effect on survival of all-polyethylene compared to metal-backed tibial components? All-polyethylene tibias had improved survival (P<0.01) in all age groups except in patients 85 years or greater, where there was no difference (P=0.16). All-polyethylene tibial components had improved survival (P<0.005) for all BMIs except in the morbidly obese (BMI ≥40) where there was no difference (P=0.20); (3) Is there an increased risk of post-operative infection? Metal-backed tibial components were found to have an increased risk of infection (HR 1.60, P=0.003); (4) Is there a difference in the rate of reoperation and post-operative complications? Metal-backed tibial components were found to have an increased risk of reoperation (HR 1.84, P<0.0001). Conclusions. The use of all-polyethylene tibias should be considered for the majority of patients, regardless of age and BMI

Background: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) overall is a very reliable, durable procedure. Biomechanical studies have suggested superior stress distribution in metal-backed tibial trays, however, these results have not been universally observed clinically. Currently, there is a paucity of information examining the survival and outcomes of all-polyethylene tibial components. Methods: We reviewed 31,939 patients undergoing a primary TKA over a 43-year period (1970–2013). There were 28,224 (88%) metal-backed and 3,715 (12%) all-polyethylene tibial components. The metal-backed and all-polyethylene groups had comparable demographics with respect to sex distribution (57% female for both) mean age (67 vs. 71 years), and mean BMI (31.6 vs. 31.1). Mean follow-up was 7 years (maximum 40 years). Results: The purpose of this investigation was to analyze the outcomes of all-polyethylene compared to metal backed components in TKA and to determine (1) is there a difference in overall survival? All-polyethylene tibial components had improved survivorship (P<0.0001) and metal backed tibias were at increased risk of revision (HR 3.41, P<0.0001). (2) Does body mass index (BMI) or age have an affect on survival of all-polyethylene compared to metal-backed tibial components? All-polyethylene tibias had improved survival (P<0.01) in all ages groups except in patients 85 years or greater, where there was no difference (P=0.16). All-polyethylene tibial components had improved survival (P<0.005) for all BMI's except in the morbidly obese (BMI ≥40) where there was no difference (P=0.20). (3) Is there an increased risk of post-operative infection? Metal-backed tibial components were found to have an increased risk of infection (HR 1.60, P=0.003). (4) Is there a difference in the rate of reoperation and post-operative complications? Metal-backed tibial components were found to have an increased risk of reoperation (HR 1.84, P<0.0001). Conclusions: The use of all-polyethylene tibias should be considered for the majority of patients, regardless of age and BMI

Background: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) overall is a very reliable, durable procedure. Biomechanical studies have suggested superior stress distribution in metal-backed tibial trays, however, these results have not been universally observed clinically. Currently there is a paucity of information examining the survival and outcomes of all-polyethylene tibial components. Methods: We reviewed 31,939 patients undergoing a primary TKA over a 43-year period (1970–2013). There were 28,224 (88%) metal-backed and 3,715 (12%) all-polyethylene tibial components. The metal-backed and all-polyethylene groups had comparable demographics with respect to sex distribution (57% female for both) mean age (67 vs. 71 years), and mean BMI (31.6 vs. 31.1). Mean follow-up was 7 years (maximum 40 years). Results: The purpose of this investigation was to analyze the outcomes of all-polyethylene compared to metal-backed components in TKA and to determine (1) is there a difference in overall survival? All-polyethylene tibial components had improved survivorship (P<0.0001) and metal-backed tibias were at increased risk of revision (HR 3.41, P<0.0001). (2) Does body mass index (BMI) or age have an effect on survival of all-polyethylene compared to metal-backed tibial components? All-polyethylene tibias had improved survival (P<0.01) in all ages groups except in patients 85 years or greater, where there was no difference (P=0.16). All-polyethylene tibial components had improved survival (P<0.005) for all BMI's except in the morbidly obese (BMI ≥40) where there was no difference (P=0.20). (3) Is there an increased risk of post-operative infection? Metal-backed tibial components were found to have an increased risk of infection (HR 1.60, P=0.003). (4) Is there a difference in the rate of reoperation and post-operative complications? Metal-backed tibial components were found to have an increased risk of reoperation (HR 1.84, P<0.0001). Conclusions: The use of all-polyethylene tibias should be considered for the majority of patients, regardless of age and BMI

Background. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) overall is a very reliable, durable procedure. Biomechanical studies have suggested superior stress distribution in metal-backed tibial trays, however, these results have not been universally observed clinically. Currently, there is a paucity of information examining the survival and outcomes of all-polyethylene tibial components. Methods. We reviewed 31,939 patients undergoing a primary TKA over a 43-year period (1970–2013). There were 28,224 (88%) metal-backed and 3,715 (12%) all-polyethylene tibial components. The metal-backed and all-polyethylene groups had comparable demographics with respect to sex distribution (57% female for both) mean age (67 vs. 71 years), and mean BMI (31.6 vs. 31.1). Mean follow-up was 7 years (maximum 40 years). Results. The purpose of this investigation was to analyze the outcomes of all-polyethylene compared to metal-backed components in TKA and to determine (1) is there a difference in overall survival? All polyethylene tibial components had improved survivorship (P<0.0001) and metal-backed tibias were at increased risk of revision (HR 3.41, P<0.0001). (2) Does body mass index (BMI) or age have an effect on survival of all-polyethylene compared to metal-backed tibial components? All-polyethylene tibias had improved survival (P<0.01) in all ages groups except in patients 85 years or greater, where there was no difference (P=0.16). All-polyethylene tibial components had improved survival (P<0.005) for all BMI's except in the morbidly obese (BMI ≥40) where there was no difference (P=0.20). (3) Is there an increased risk of post-operative infection? Metal-backed tibial components were found to have an increased risk of infection (HR 1.60, P=0.003). (4) Is there a difference in the rate of reoperation and post-operative complications? Metal-backed tibial components were found to have an increased risk of reoperation (HR 1.84, P<0.0001). Conclusions. The use of all-polyethylene tibias should be considered for the majority of patients, regardless of age and BMI

Introduction. There is a demand for longer lasting arthroplasty implants driving the investigation of novel material combinations. PEEK has shown promise as an arthroplasty bearing material, with potentially relatively bio inert wear debris [1]. When coupled with an all-polyethylene tibial component this combination shows potential as a metal-free knee. In this study, the suitability of PEEK Optima® as an alternative to cobalt chrome for the femoral component of total knee replacements was assessed using experimental knee wear simulation under two kinematic conditions. Methods. Three cobalt chrome and three injection moulded PEEK Optima® (Invibio Biomaterial Solutions, UK) femoral components of similar geometry and surface roughness (mean surface roughness (Ra) ∼0.02µm) were coupled with all-polyethylene GUR1020 (conventional, unsterilised) tibial components in a 6 station ProSim knee simulator (Simulation Solutions, UK). 3 million cycles (MC) of wear simulation were carried out under intermediate kinematics (maximum anterior-posterior (AP) displacement 5mm) followed by 3MC under high kinematics (AP 10mm) [2] with 25% serum as the lubricant. The wear of the tibial component was assessed gravimetrically. At each measurement point, the surface roughness of the femoral components was determined using contacting profilometry and throughout testing, the bulk lubricant temperature was monitored close to the articulating surfaces. Statistical analysis was carried out using ANOVA, with significance at p<0.05. Results. Figure 1 shows the wear rate of the all-polyethylene tibial components. After 3MC of intermediate kinematics, the mean wear rate of UHMWPE articulating against cobalt chrome was 1.0±2.3mm3/MC and against PEEK was similar (p=0.06) 2.5±0.8mm3/MC. Scratches were apparent on the surface of the PEEK implant in the AP direction significantly (p<0.05) increasing mean surface roughness of the PEEK components (Table 1) compared to pre-test values. The surface topography of the cobalt chrome components (Table 2) was similar to pre-test measurements. Increasing AP displacement caused no significant increase in the wear of the tibial inserts against either material. Under intermediate kinematics, the mean bulk lubricant temperature was 28.0±0.7°C for cobalt chrome and significantly higher (p<0.001) for PEEK, 29.5±0.1°C; kinematic conditions had no effect on the lubricant temperature. Conclusions. This study showed a similar wear rate of all-polyethylene tibial components against PEEK and cobalt chrome femoral components of similar initial surface topography and geometry. Wear simulation with a higher AP displacement did not increase the wear of the polyethylene, in contrast to other designs of knee replacements, potentially due to the low conforming geometry of the implant [3]. The linear scratching on the surface of the PEEK implants did not increase the wear rate of the tibial components and the surface did not deteriorate further between 3 and 6 MC. A higher mean lubricant temperature was measured with PEEK femoral components, which was attributed to the higher friction of the PEEK-PE bearing couple. However it is not known whether this is clinically relevant or an artefact of the continuous running of the simulator. PEEK Optima® shows promise as the femoral component in a metal-free knee

Purpose. The aim of the present study was to look at survivorship and patient satisfaction of a fixed bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with an all-polyethylene tibial component. Materials and Methods. We report the survivorship of 91 fixed bearing unicompartmental arthroplasties with all-polyethylene tibial components (Preservation DePuy UK), which were used for medial compartment osteoarthritis in 79 patients between 2004 and 2007. The satisfaction level of patients who had not undergone revision of the implant was also recorded. For comparison, we reviewed 49 mobile bearing unicompartmental arthroplasties (Oxford UKA Biomet UK Ltd), which had been used in 44 patients between 1998 and 2007. Results. Mean length of follow up of patients with the fixed bearing implant was 44.7 months (range 24 - 74 months) and for the mobile bearing replacement, the mean follow up was 67.6 months (24 - 119). In the fixed bearing design, at maximum follow up period of 74 months, 8 implants (8.8%) had been revised (or were listed for revision) to total knee replacement and in the mobile bearing design over the maximum follow up period of 119 months there had been only one revision (2.0%). Patients who had not undergone revision were asked if they were satisfied with their knee following the unicompartmental arthroplasty. In the fixed bearing design, 83.5% said that they were satisfied with the outcome of the operation compared to 93.9% of the patients receiving the mobile bearing design. Conclusion. We conclude that there is a higher incidence of revision of this fixed bearing design using an all-polyethylene tibial component compared to the mobile bearing design. We found that those patients who had not required revision had a lower rate of satisfaction with the fixed bearing compared to the mobile bearing design

While the vast majority of total knee replacements performed throughout the world employ a modular metal-backed tibial tray, and not an all-polyethylene tray, this issue remains controversial. Proposed advantages to a metal-backed tray include: a) decreased bending strains, b) reduces compressive stresses in the cement and cancellous bone beneath the baseplate (especially in asymmetric loading), c) distributes load more evenly across the interface. Proposed advantages of an all-polyethylene tray include: a) cost reduction, b) reduced polyethylene thickness with the same amount of bone resection, c) increased tensile stresses at the interface during eccentric loading. The challenge is at present we don't know the >10-year track record of current generation tibial components. This debate centers on the <60-year-old. This is the most difficult patient in total knee arthroplasty with higher revision rates than an older cohort. It makes sense to use an all-polyethylene tibia if the revision rates turn out to be similar and you don't intend to do a polyethylene exchange in the future. It makes sense to do a modular tray if the results are similar, but there is an intention to do a polyethylene exchange in the future. If either one of these implants choices has a lower cumulative revision rate, then that is the implant of choice at present. However, we need to understand that at present we don't know if the results of current generation all-polyethylene tibial components will indeed be equal to metal-backed components. The most recent data from the Australian registry suggests that in fact all-polyethylene tibial components have a higher failure rate than metal-backed components when looking at the entire class of design. This would be expected to be even more significant in the younger patient

There is no question that excellent long-term results have been demonstrated with all-polyethylene tibial components. Moreover, improvements in polyethylene to increase wear resistance, maintain mechanical strength, and improve oxidative resistance lend even greater credence to the use of an all-polyethylene tibial component. There are several issues of concern. In revision knee replacement for reasons such as patellofemoral problems where the components are otherwise ideal, the arthrotomy performed during the revision usually creates a slight laxity requiring a thicker polyethylene or even a different tibial conformity. With an all-polyethylene tibia, this would require full component revision. It is also true that, even after careful trial reduction, the surgeon occasionally will find that the final construct is slightly lax requiring a thicker final insert. This again is difficult in the situation of all-polyethylene tibia. One of the advantages of an all-polyethylene tibia is to avoid back-sided wear that posed a substantial problem in the past. Most component systems have successfully dealt with a problem of back-sided wear making the advantage of a nonmodular all-polyethylene tibia moot. Finally, in a modular system, the surgeon has the advantage of cementing all components with the tibial trial and then having the ability to remove the trial component, clear the back of the knee and insert the final insert. Lowering health care costs is a laudable and necessary endeavor. We must choose TKR implants to fit patient demand and not overuse or underuse technology and know the true cost of the implants we use

There is no question that excellent long-term results have been demonstrated with all-polyethylene tibial components. Moreover, improvements in polyethylene to increase wear resistance, maintain mechanical strength, and improve oxidative resistance lend even greater credence to the use of an all-polyethylene tibial component. There are several issues of concern. In revision knee replacement for reasons such as patellofemoral problems where the components are otherwise ideal, the arthrotomy performed during the revision usually creates a slight laxity requiring a thicker polyethylene or even a different tibial conformity. With an all-polyethylene tibia, this would require full component revision. It is also true that, even after careful trial reduction, the surgeon occasionally will find that the final construct is slightly lax requiring a thicker final insert. This again is difficult in the situation of all-polyethylene tibia. One of the advantages of an all-polyethylene tibia is to avoid back-side wear that posed a substantial problem in the past. Most component systems have successfully dealt with the problem of back-side wear making the advantage of a nonmodular all-polyethylene tibia moot. Finally, in a modular system, the surgeon has the advantage of cementing all components with the tibial trial and then having the ability to remove the trial component, clear the back of the knee and insert the final insert

Metal-backed tibial components in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) currently dominate the orthopaedic market due to intra-operative flexibility afforded by modularity. Metal-backing was first used in TKA as a method to potentially improve loading distributions over the tibial plateau at the interface between the prosthesis and the supporting cancellous bone. Many studies have compared metal-backed and all-polyethylene tibial components with variable survivorship. We have found decreased clinical survivorship with all-polyethylene Anatomic Graduated Component (AGC) TKA's (Biomet, Inc, Warsaw, Indiana) compared to the non-modular metal-backed design at 10-year follow up, 68% vs 98%, respectively. Loosening or bony collapse beneath the medial plateau accounted for 74% of failures in our AGC all-polyethylene cohort. We hypothesised that all-polyethylene tibial components may lead to increased strains in the proximal tibia with the AGC-TKA design, possibly correlating to osseous overload in the medial compartment and accounting for the increased observed rates of clinical failures in the all-polyethylene group. Finite element studies and our lab studies have shown that metal-backing reduces system stresses in the PMMA bone cement, as well as in the underlying cancellous bone. Overall, in every measurement region with a statistically significant difference in shear strain, higher strain was measured in the all-polyethylene implanted tibiae compared to metal-backed components. Statistically significant increases in strain from 126 μɛ (p=0.0131) to 745 μɛ (p=0.0011) and from 40% (p=0.0010) to 587% (p=0.0054) were seen in the all-polyethylene experimental group. We believe this may correlate with the higher failure rates we have observed in the AGC all-polyethylene cohort compared to the metal-backed cohort from our institution. Other all-poly TKA designs with varied articular congruities may afford improved or equal survivorship to metal backed implants at a reduced cost

Aims: In this study, data from previously published survival analysis life tables of primary total condylar type TKRs has been combined to enable comparison of different design features. In particular, does posterior stabilisation or metal backing of the tibial component improve the longevity of primary cemented þxed bearing condylar type TKRs?Methods: To be included, the article had to give 5 or more years results of a primary cemented þxed bearing condylar type TKRs including a survival analysis life table. Series performed on a selected patient group (for example young age, elderly or rheumatoid arthritis) were excluded to reduce possible bias. When 2 series of the same implant from the same institution were available, the most recent article with the longest follow up was used. Results: Survival analysis data from 16 papers (5950 knees) was combined to compare design features. There was no difference in survival between posterior stabilised implants and those that were not or between metal-backed and all-polyethylene tibial components. Those all-polyethylene tibial components that were not stabilised had signiþcantly better survival than metal-backed, non stabilised tibial components and posterior stabilised, metalbacked components (p< 0.05) but not posterior stabilised, all-polyethylene components. Conclusions: Using the currently available literature, posterior stabilisation or metal backing of the tibial component does not improve the longevity of primary cemented þxed bearing condylar type TKRs

Implant selection in TKA remains highly variable. Surgeons consider pre-operative deformity, patient factors such as BMI and bone quality, surgical experience, retention or substitution for the PCL, type of articulation and polyethylene, cost, and fixation with or without cement. We have most frequently implanted the same implant for the majority of patients. This is based on the fact that multiple large series of TKAs have demonstrated that the most durable TKAs have been non-modular metal-backed tibial components, retention of the PCL, with a cemented all-polyethylene patellar component. Polymer wear must be addressed for long-term durability. One method for reducing polyethylene wear is eliminating modularity between a metal-backed tray and the articular bearing surface. This can be done with a metal-backed implant as with the IB-1, AGC, Vanguard Mono-lock, or with elimination of the metal backing via a one piece all-polyethylene tibial component. The all-polyethylene implants appear design and patient sensitive. We observed higher clinical failure rates in a flat-on-flat design. Other authors have observed improved survivorship with coronal dishing of the articular surfaces which centralises osseous stresses. All-polyethylene implants have promise in the future but require proven design and fixation design features

25–40% of unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) revisions are performed for unexplained pain possibly secondary to elevated proximal tibial bone strain. This study investigates the effect of tibial component metal backing and polyethylene thickness on cancellous bone strain in a finite element model (FEM) of a cemented fixed bearing medial UKR, validated using previously published acoustic emission data (AE). FEMs of composite tibiae implanted with an all-polyethylene tibial component (AP) and a metal backed one (MB) were created. Polyethylene of thickness 6–10mm in 2mm increments was loaded to a medial load of 2500N. The volume of cancellous bone exposed to <−3000 (pathological overloading) and <−7000 (failure limit) minimum principal (compressive) microstrain (µ∊) and >3000 and >7000 maximum principal (tensile) microstrain was measured. Linear regression analysis showed good correlation between measured AE hits and volume of cancellous bone elements with compressive strain <−3000µ∊: correlation coefficients (R= 0.947, R2 = 0.847), standard error of the estimate (12.6 AE hits) and percentage error (12.5%) (p<0.001). AP implants displayed greater cancellous bone strains than MB implants for all strain variables at all loads. Patterns of strain differed between implants: MB concentrations at the lateral edge; AP concentrations at the keel, peg and at the region of load application. AP implants had 2.2 (10mm) to 3.2 (6mm) times the volume of cancellous bone compressively strained <−7000µ∊ than the MB implants. Altering MB polyethylene insert thickness had no effect. We advocate using caution with all-polyethylene UKR implants especially in large or active patients where loads are higher

Introduction:. The earliest evidence of particle-induced response is found in the synovium, leading to osteolytic defect. The degree of synovitis can be quantified by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This is the first long-term, prospective, matched-pair study using MRI to analyze wear-induced synovitis and osteolysis between rotating-platform posterior-stabilized (RP-PS), fixed-bearing metal-back (FB-MB), and all-polyethylene tibial (APT) designs in active patients with identical femoral components and polyethylene. Methods:. From September 1999 to October 2001, a matched-pair analysis of 24 TKAs (18 patients, 3 groups: 8 RP-PS, 8 FB-MB, and 8 APT) was performed. TKAs were matched for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) activity scores. All patients underwent MRI using MAVRIC (multi-acquisition variable-resonance image combination) knee protocol designed to reduce metal susceptibility artifact. Images were evaluated for volumetric measure of synovitis and/or osteolysis and presence of fibrous membrane formation at the cement-bone interface. Results:. The mean age was 64 ± 5 years (59–72). The mean follow-up was 11.6 ± 0.7 years (10–13). The mean UCLA score at the time of surgery was 8.5 ± 2.6 (5–10). Reactive synovitis was observed in 6 RP-PS (75%), all 8 FB-MB (100%), and 6 APT (75%) knees. There was a significant difference between the volumetric synovitis in RP-PS (4046 mm3 ± 4502 mm3), and FB-MB knees (24498 mm3 ± 22248 mm3), p < 0.001. Osteolysis with bone loss more than 4 mm was seen in 3 FB-MB, 2 APT, but in none of the RP-PS knees. There was no statistical difference for osteolysis between the three designs. Conclusion:. Based of this study, it appears that particle induced synovitis is evident in all 3 types of bearing surfaces, however, it is significantly less in the RP-PS group. This is in contradiction to the report of retrieval studies