title: Is kinematic total knee replacement better than total hip replacement?
abstract: Revision rates, complication rates, and the bone-cement interface reaction of 1,069 condylar total knee replacements were reviewed to help decide if conventional total knee replacement continues to be appropriate for the older low-demand patient. This knee replacement series was also compared with two published series of total hip replacements from the same institution. The conclusions are (1) in medium-term follow-up, total knee replacement is as good as or superior to total hip replacement and (2) based on bone-cement interface analysis, survival of total knee replacement is expected to be superior to conventional total hip replacement ten years postoperatively.
authors.affiliation: Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
authors.forename: F C
authors.initials: FC
authors.lastname: Ewald
authors.forename: H P
authors.initials: HP
authors.lastname: Hsu
authors.forename: P S
authors.initials: PS
authors.lastname: Walker
mesh_terms: D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006621:Hip Joint / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery; D006622:Hip Prosthesis; D006801:Humans; D007719:Knee Joint / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery; D007720:Knee Prosthesis; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D011859:Radiography