A comparison of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty at a minimum follow-up of 4.5 years

Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery

Volumn 87, Issue 10, 2005, Pages 2290-2296

  Bhan, S ^a   Malhotra, R ^a   Kiran, E Krishna ^a   Shukla, Sourav ^a   Bijjawara, Mahesh ^a  

^a ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (India)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; KNEE ARTHRITIS; KNEE FUNCTION; KNEE RADIOGRAPHY; MALE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; REOPERATION; SCORING SYSTEM; SURVIVAL RATE; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT; WEIGHT BEARING;

EID: 26044476613     PISSN: 00219355     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02221     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Callahan CM, Drake BG, Heck DA, Dittus RS. Patient outcomes following tricompartmental total knee replacement. A meta-analysis. JAMA. 1994;271:1349-57.
2. Colizza WA, Insall JN, Scuderi GR. The posterior stabilized total knee prosthesis. Assessment of polyethylene damage and osteolysis after a ten-year-minimum follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77:1713-20.
3. Engh GA. Failure of the polyethylene bearing surface of a total knee replacement within four years. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988;70:1093-6.
4. Buechel FF. Low contact stress meniscal bearing knee replacement: design concepts, failure mechanisms and long-term survivorship. In: Insall JN, Scott WN, Scuderi GR, editors. Current concepts in primary and revision total knee arthroplasty. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1996. p 47.
5. Buechel FF, Pappas MJ. The New Jersey Low-Contact-Stress Knee Replacement System: biomechanical rationale and review of the first 123 cemented cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1986;105:197-204.
6. Stern SH, Insall JN. Total knee arthroplasty with posterior cruciate ligament substitution designs. In: Insall JN, Scott WN, editors. Surgery of the knee. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone; 2001. p 1660-94.
7. Scott WN, Rubinstein M, Scuderi G. Results after knee replacement with a posterior cruciate-substituting prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988;70: 1163-73.
8. Groh GI, Parker J, Elliott J, Pearl AJ. Results of total knee arthroplasty using the posterior stabilized condylar prosthesis. A report of 137 consecutive cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;269:58-62.
9. Sorrells RB, Stiehl JB, Voorhorst PE. Midterm results of mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty in patients younger than 65 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;390:182-9.
10. Keblish PA, Varma AK, Greenwald AS. Patellar resurfacing or retention in total knee arthroplasty. A prospective study of patients with bilateral replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994;76:930-7.
11. Soudry M, Mestriner LA, Binazzi R, Insall JN. Total knee arthroplasty without patellar resurfacing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986;205:166-70.
12. Ewald FC. Leg lift technique for simultaneous femoral, tibial and patella prosthetic cementing, rule of "no thumb" for patella tracking and "steel rod rule" for ligament tension. Tech Orthop. 1991;6:44-6.
13. Insall JN, Dorr LO, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;248:13-4.
14. Stern SH, Insall JN. Total knee arthroplasty in obese patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990;72:1400-4.
15. A knee function assessment chart. From the British Orthopaedic Association Research Sub-Committee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1978;60:308-9.
16. Ewald FC. The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;248:9-12.
17. Callaghan JJ, Squire MW, Goetz DD, Sullivan PM, Johnston RC. Cemented rotating-platform total knee replacement. A nine to twelve-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82:705-11.
18. Robertsson O, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L. Arthroplasty for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis 1986-1995: outcome following validation of the Swedish national register. Read at the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 1999 Feb 4-8; Anaheim, CA.
19. Insall JN, Hood RW, Flawn LB, Sullivan DJ. The total condylar knee prosthesis in gonarthrosis. A five to nine-year follow-up of the first one hundred consecutive replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1983;65:619-28.
20. Ranawat CS, Boachie-Adjei O. Survivorship analysis and results of total condylar arthroplasty. Eight- to 11-year follow-up period. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988;226:6-13.
21. Buechel FF, Pappas MJ. Long-term survival analysis of cruciate-sparing versus cruciate-sacrificing knee prostheses using meniscal bearings. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990;260:162-9.
22. Stern SH, Insall JN. Posterior stabilized prosthesis. Results after follow-up of nine to twelve years. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74:980-6.
23. Ranawat CS, Flynn WF Jr, Saddler S, Hansraj KK, Maynard MJ. Long-term results of the total condylar arthroplasty. A 15-year survivorship study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993;286:94-102.
24. Ranawat CS, Flynn WF Jr, Deshmukh RG. Impact of modern technique on long-term results of total condylar knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;309:131-5.
25. Diduch DR, Insall JN, Scott WN, Scuderi GR, Font-Rodriguez D. Total knee replacement in young, active patients. Long-term follow-up and functional outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997;79:575-82.
26. Jordan LR, Olivo JL, Voorhorst PE. Survivorship analysis of cementless meniscal bearing total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;338:119-23.
27. Bugbee WD, Ammeen DJ, Parks NL, Engh GA. 4- to 10-year results with the anatomic modular total knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;348:158-65.
28. Kaper BP, Smith PN, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, Robertson D. Medium-term results of a mobile bearing total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999; 367:201-9.
29. Kim YH, Koo HK, Kim JS. Comparison of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;392:101-15.
30. Buechel FF Sr, Buechel FF Jr, Pappas MJ, D'Alessio J. Twenty-year evaluation of meniscal bearing and rotating platform knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;388:41-50.
31. Stiehl JB, Voorhorst PE. Total knee arthroplasty with a mobile-bearing prosthesis: comparison of retention and sacrifice of the posterior cruciate ligament in cementless implants. Am J Orthop. 1999;28:223-8.
32. Figgie HE 3rd, Goldberg VM, Heiple KG, Moller HS 3rd, Gordon NH. The influence of tibial-patellofemoral location on function of the knee in patients with the posterior stabilized condylar knee prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1986;68:1035-40.
33. L'Insalata JL, Stern SH, Insall JN. Total knee arthroplasty in elderly patients. Comparison of tibial component designs. J Arthroplasty. 1992;7:261-6.
34. Most E, Li G, Schule S, Sultan P, Park SE, Zayontz S, Rubash HE. The kinematics of fixed- and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;416:197-207.
35. D'Lima DD, Trice M, Urquhart AG, Colwell CW Jr. Comparison between the kinematics of fixed and rotating bearing knee prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;380:151-7.
36. Chmell MJ, Scott RD. Total knee arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. An overview. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999;366:54-60.
37. Buechel FF, Pappas MJ. New Jersey low contact stress knee replacement system. Ten-year evaluation of meniscal bearings. Orthop Clin North Am. 1989;20:147-77.
38. Erratum in: Orthop Clin North Am. 1989;20:preceding 519.
39. Keblish P. Results and complications of the LCS (Low Contact Stress) knee system. Acta Orthop Belg. 1991;57 Suppl 2:124-7.