Purpose: High contact stresses and wear after total knee replacement (TKR) has been a problem. Mobile bearing TKRs have been advocated as a means to increase load bearing area, reduce contact stresses and minimize wear. The purpose of this study was to compare two, large, consecutive cohorts of TKR patients with greater than 10 years follow-up, one with a fixed bearing and one with a mobile bearing design.
Method: One hundred and three SAL II mobile bearing TKR’s were compared to a gender, age, BMI and time from surgery matched fixed bearing Genesis II cohort of equal size. All surgeries were performed between September 1993 and December 2000 (average follow-up, 11.64±1.64 years). Inclusion criteria included patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Exclusion criteria included revision arthroplasty, inflammatory arthritis, a prior osteotomy or a prior patellectomy. The >
10 year Kaplan-Meier survivorship, health-related outcomes (Knee Society scores, WOMAC and SF-12), radiographs and retrieved implants for the fixed and mobile bearing TKR cohorts were compared.
Results: Fixed bearing TKRs demonstrated better 10 year Kaplan-Meier survivorships for any re-operation, 1.000±0.000 compared to 0.969±0.018 for mobile bearings (Genesis II and SAL I/II respectively). Revision rates were significantly different between groups with fixed bearing having no revisions and mobile four revisions (3.9%). No cases were revised for sepsis. Mobile bearing revisions were for pain (1), patellar maltracking (1), polyethylene wear (1) and aseptic loosening (1). At 10 years, health-related outcomes were similar between the two cohorts. Fixed bearing TKRs demonstrated more range of motion (111.42±12.76 vs 107.19±14.74 degrees) although not significant (p=0.052). Wear was more frequently noted in mobile bearing TKRs on >
10 year radiographs.
Conclusion: In this comparison of two contemporary TKRs, the fixed bearing TKR outperformed the mobile bearing TKR.