title: Mobile-bearing prosthesis did not improve mid-term clinical results of total knee arthroplasty.
abstract: A prospective study was performed to compare the clinical and radiological results of mobile- and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty with specific attention to rotational alignment and range of motion. Sixty-one knees were assigned to total knee arthroplasty with either the NexGen LPS Flex fixed-bearing or with the NexGen LPS Flex mobile-bearing prosthesis. Postoperatively, knees were compared with regard to range of motion, clinical score, and radiographic findings. Rotational alignment of the femoral and tibial components was evaluated by computed tomography. The median follow-up period was 5.9 years (range 2.1-8.8 years). Median postoperative Knee Society scores were 99 points (68-100) for the fixed-bearing group and 100 points (66-100) for the mobile-bearing group (n.s.). The median postoperative flexion angles of 120° (90°-150°) for the fixed-bearing group and 125° (90°-145°) for the mobile-bearing group were not significantly different from each other (n.s.). No knee required revision surgery due to wear of polyethylene or loosening of the component in either group. Computed tomography showed that 11 knees had rotational mismatches of more than 10° between the femoral and tibial components, but no significant difference was found in the postoperative extension and flexion angles or in the clinical score between the two treatment groups. Using the identical design for both fixed- and mobile-bearing prostheses, this prospective, randomized study did not show any clinical advantages of the mobile-bearing knee. Analysis of rotational alignment by CT scan did not reveal a particular advantage of the self-aligning mechanism of mobile-bearing implants.
authors.affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashiku, Fukuoka 812-8582, Japan. mazda@ortho.med.kyushu-u.ac.jp
authors.forename: Shuichi
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Matsuda
authors.forename: Hideki
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Mizu-uchi
authors.forename: Shingo
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Fukagawa
authors.forename: Hiromasa
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Miura
authors.forename: Ken
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Okazaki
authors.forename: Hideo
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Matsuda
authors.forename: Yukihide
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Iwamoto
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D019645:Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D015331:Cohort Studies; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D007720:Knee Prosthesis; D008297:Male; D020370:Osteoarthritis, Knee / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular / Q000502:physiology*; D020127:Recovery of Function; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D013997:Time Factors; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D016474:Weight-Bearing
references.citation: Int Orthop. 2005 Jun;29(3):179-81
references.pmid: 15809873
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1978 Nov-Dec;(137):268-75
references.pmid: 743838
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003 Jan;85(1):62-7
references.pmid: 12585579
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007 Oct;89(10):1317-23
references.pmid: 17957070
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 Aug;88(8):1016-21
references.pmid: 16877599
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Oct;87(10):2290-6
references.pmid: 16203896
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998 Nov;(356):144-53
references.pmid: 9917679
references.citation: Knee. 2008 Jun;15(3):206-10
references.pmid: 18329883
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 May;(434):193-7
references.pmid: 15864052
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006 Jun;447:105-11
references.pmid: 16456313
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 1999 Jan;14(1):82-90
references.pmid: 9926958
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Sep;91(9):2104-12
references.pmid: 19723986
references.citation: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1986;105(4):197-204
references.pmid: 3753173
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2005 Feb;20(2):145-53
references.pmid: 15902852
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1978 Aug;60-B(3):358-69
references.pmid: 581081
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2004 Feb;19(2):135-40
references.pmid: 14973854
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006 Jul;448:114-21
references.pmid: 16826105
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Nov;(428):174-9
references.pmid: 15534540
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Nov;(428):207-13
references.pmid: 15534544
references.citation: J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2001 Jun;9(1):45-50
references.pmid: 12468843
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 1998 Sep;13(6):699-706
references.pmid: 9741449
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003 Nov;(416):197-207
references.pmid: 14646762
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Nov;(428):221-7
references.pmid: 15534546
references.citation: Acta Orthop Scand. 2002 Dec;73(6):638-46
references.pmid: 12553510
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2008 Feb;23(2):164-9
references.pmid: 18280407
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2009 Sep;24(6 Suppl):24-7
references.pmid: 19553072
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005 Apr;87(4):483-8
references.pmid: 15795197