Treatment of end-stage anteromedial osteoarthritis (AMOA) of the knee is commonly approached using one of two surgical strategies: medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In this study we aim to investigate if there is any difference in outcome for patients undergoing UKA or TKA, when treated by high-volume surgeons, in high-volume centres, using two different clinical guidelines. The two strategies are ‘UKA whenever possible’ vs TKA for all patients with AMOA. A total of 501 consecutive AMOA patients (301 UKA) operated on between 2013 to 2016 in two high-volume centres were included. Centre One employed clinical guidelines for the treatment of AMOA allowing either UKA or TKA, but encouraged UKA wherever possible. Centre Two used clinical guidelines that treated all patients with a TKA, regardless of wear pattern. TKA patients were included if they had isolated AMOA on preoperative radiographs. Data were collected from both centres’ local databases. The primary outcome measure was change in Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and the proportion of patients achieving the patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) at one-year follow-up. The data were 1:1 propensity score matched before regression models were used to investigate potential differences.Aims
Methods
This study compares the PFC total knee arthroplasty (TKA) system in a prospective randomized control trial (RCT) of the mobile-bearing rotating-platform (RP) TKA against the fixed-bearing (FB) TKA. This is the largest RCT with the longest follow-up where cruciate-retaining PFC total knee arthroplasties are compared in a non-bilateral TKA study. A total of 167 patients (190 knees with 23 bilateral cases), were recruited prospectively and randomly assigned, with 91 knees receiving the RP and 99 knees receiving FB. The mean age was 65.5 years (48 to 82), the mean body mass index (BMI) was 29.7 kg/m2 (20 to 52) and 73 patients were female. The Knee Society Score (KSS), Knee Society Functional Score (KSFS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey Physical and Mental Component Scores (SF-12 PCS, SF-12 MCS) were gathered and recorded preoperatively, at five-years’ follow-up, and at ten years’ follow-up. Additionally, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) were collected at five- and ten-year follow-ups. The prevalence of radiolucent lines (RL) on radiographs and implant survival were recorded at five- and ten-year follow-ups.Aims
Patients and Methods
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:
