Mobile-bearing (MB) total knee replacement (TKR)
was introduced to reduce the risk of aseptic loosening and wear of
polyethylene inserts. However, no consistent clinical advantages
of mobile- over fixed-bearing (FB) TKR have been found. In this
study we evaluated whether mobile bearings have an advantage over
fixed bearings with regard to revision rates and clinical outcome
scores. Furthermore, we determined which modifying variables affected
the outcome. A systematic search of the literature was conducted to collect
clinical trials comparing MB and FB in primary TKR. The primary
outcomes were revision rates for any reason, aseptic loosening and
wear. Secondary outcomes included range of movement, Knee Society
score (KSS), Oxford knee score (OKS), Short-Form 12 (SF-12) score
and radiological parameters. Meta-regression techniques were used
to explore factors modifying the observed effect. Our search yielded 1827 publications, of which 41 studies met
our inclusion criteria, comprising over 6000 TKRs. Meta-analyses
showed no clinically relevant differences in terms of revision rates,
clinical outcome scores or patient-reported outcome measures between
MB and FB TKRs. It appears that theoretical assumptions of superiority
of MB over FB TKR are not borne out in clinical practice. Cite this article:
The purpose of this study was to undertake a
meta-analysis to determine whether there is lower polyethylene wear and
longer survival when using mobile-bearing implants in total knee
replacement when compared with fixed-bearing implants. Of 975 papers
identified, 34 trials were eligible for data extraction and meta-analysis
comprising 4754 patients (6861 knees). We found no statistically
significant differences between the two designs in terms of the incidence
of radiolucent lines, osteolysis, aseptic loosening or survival.
There is thus currently no evidence to suggest that the use of mobile-bearing
designs reduce polyethylene wear and prolong survival after total
knee replacement. Cite this article:
Clinical experience of impaction bone grafting for revision knee arthroplasty is limited, with initial stability of the tibial tray emerging as a major concern. The length of the stem and its diameter have been altered to improve stability. Our aim was to investigate the effect of the type of stem, support of the rim and graft impaction on early stability of the tray. We developed a system for impaction grafting of trays which we used with morsellised bone in artificial tibiae. Trays with short, long thick or long thin stems were implanted, with or without support of the rim. They were cyclically loaded while measuring relative movement. Long-stemmed trays migrated 4.5 times less than short-stemmed trays, regardless of diameter. Those with support migrated 2.8 times less than those without. The migration of short-stemmed trays correlated inversely with the density of the impacted groups. That of impaction-grafted tibial trays was in the range reported for uncemented primary trays. Movements of short-stemmed trays without cortical support were largest and sensitive to the degree of compaction of the graft. If support of the rim was sufficient or a long stem was used, impacted morsellised bone graft achieved adequate initial stability.
