Please check your email for the verification action. You may continue to use the site and you are now logged in, but you will not be able to return to the site in future until you confirm your email address.
Purpose: To comapre the clinical results and costs of a non-modular, all-polyethylene tibial component versus a modular tibial component in patients older than 70.
Methods: A multi-center (London, Ontario; Halifax, Nova Scotia) prospective randomized clinical trial was designed to compare modular metal-backed versus an all polyethylene tibial component in patients over 70 years. Primary outcome measures include Knee Society Clinical Rating System, WOMAC, SF-12, Kaplan-Meier Survivorship.
Results: Between September 1995 and August 1997, 127 total knee replacements (Genesis I, Smith &
Nephew) were randomized to receive either a non-modular (all-polyethylene) tibial baseplate or a modular (metal-backed) baseplate. Minimum follow-up was 8 years. Excluding patients who died or became disabled due to medical problems, no consistent significant differences have been seen in regard to the WOMAC, SF-12, and Knee Society scores between the two groups. Kaplan-Meier Survivorship is 93% with a mean survival time of 9.36 years for the non-modular group and 94.1% with a mean survival time of 9.49 years for the modular group. The cost saving in the non-modular group was approximately $800 per TKR without any compromise in clinical outcome.
Conclusions: There was no difference found in the clinical outcome scores between an all polyethylene tibial baseplate and a modular tibial component in patients over 70 years of age. Non-modular tibial baseplates have a list price of 23–65% the cost of their modular counterparts. A high mortality rate exists in this age group limiting the numbers available for longer term review. The use of an all polyethylene tibial component is a cost effective and clinically successful alternative in the older patient requiring total knee replacement.