Randomized Controlled Trial of Radiographic and Patient-Assessed Outcomes Following Fixed Versus Rotating Platform Total Knee Arthroplasty

Journal of Arthroplasty

Volumn 25, Issue 8, 2010, Pages 1201-1208

  Rahman, Wael A ^a   Garbuz, Donald S ^a   Masri, Bassam A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Fixed bearing; Randomized clinical trial; Rotating platform; Total knee arthroplasty

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; BONE CEMENT; HEPARIN;

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTHROFIBROSIS; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEEP VEIN THROMBOSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; JOINT STIFFNESS; KNEE PAIN; KNEE RADIOGRAPHY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RANGE OF MOTION; SCORING SYSTEM; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTHRITIS, RHEUMATOID; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; KNEE JOINT; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS, KNEE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 78249240101     PISSN: 08835403     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.10.002     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Collier M.B., Engh C.A., MCauley J.P., et al. Osteolysis after total knee arthroplasty: influence of tibial base-plate surface finish and sterilization of polyethylene insert: findings at five to ten years postoperatively. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87A:2702.
2. Conditt M.A., Stein J.A., Noble P.C. Factors affecting the severity of backside wear of modular tibial inserts. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004, 86A:305.
3. Conditt M.A., Thompson M.T., Usrey M.M., et al. Backside wear of polyethylene tibial inserts: mechanism and magnitude of material loss. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87A:326.
4. Lachiewicz P.F., Soileau E.S. The rates of osteolysis and loosening associated with a modular posterior stabilized knee replacement: results at five to fourteen years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004, 86A:525.
5. Mikulak S.A., Mahoney O.M., de la Rosa M.A., et al. Loosening and osteolysis with press-fit condylar posterior-cruciate-substituting total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001, 83A:398.
6. O'Rourke M.R., Callaghan J.J., Goetz D.D., et al. Osteolysis associated with a cemented modular posterior-cruciate-substituting total knee design: five to eight-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002, 84A:1362.
7. Rao A.R., Engh G.A., Collier M.B., et al. Tibial interface wear in retrieved total knee components and correlations with modular insert motion. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2002, 84A:1849.
8. O'Connor J.J., Goodfellow J.W. Theory and practice of meniscal knee replacement: designing against wear. Pro Inst Mech Eng [H] 1996, 210:217.
9. Menchetti P.P.M., Walker P.S. Mechanical evaluation of mobile bearing knees. Am J Knee Surg 1997, 10:73.
10. Morra E.A., Postak P.D., Greenwald A.S. The influence of mobile bearing knee geometry on the wear of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene tibial inserts: a finite element study 1999, [exhibit].
11. Bartel D.L., Bicknel V.L., Wright T.M. The effect of conformity, thickness, and material on stresses in ultra-high molecular weight components for total joint replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1986, 68A:1041.
12. Buechel F.F., Pappas M.J. Long-term survivorship analysis of cruciate-sparing versus cruciate-sacrificing knee prostheses using meniscal bearings. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1990, 260:162.
13. Goodfellow J. Knee prostheses: one step forward, two steps back. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1992, 74B:1.
14. Insall J.N. Adventures in mobile bearing knee design: a mid-life crisis. Orthopedics 1998, 21:1021.
15. Kim Y.H., Kook H.K., Kim J.S. Comparison of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001, 392:101.
16. Price A.J., Rees J.L., Beard D., et al. A mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis compared with a fixed-bearing prosthesis: a multicenter single-blind randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003, 85B:62.
17. Argenson J.N., O'Connor J.J. Polyethylene wear in meniscal knee replacement; a one to nine-year retrieval analysis of the Oxford knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1992, 74B:228.
18. Barrett D.S., Cobb A.G., Bentley G. Joint proprioception in normal, osteoarthritic and replaced knees. J Bone and Joint Surg Br 1991, 73B:53.
19. Bert J.M. Dislocation subluxation of meniscal bearing elements after New Jersey Low-Contact Stress total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1990, 254:211.
20. Blunn G.W., Walker P.S., Joshi A., et al. The dominance of cyclic sliding in producing wear in total knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1991, 273:253.
21. Buechel F., Pappas M.J. 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.
22. Buechel F.F., Pappas M.J. New Jersey Low Contact Stress knee replacement system. Ten-year evaluation of meniscal bearings. Orthop Clin North Am 1989, 20:147.
23. Buechel F.F., Rosa R.A., Pappas M.J. A metal-backed, rotating-bearing patellar prosthesis to lower contact stress. An 11-year clinical study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989, 248:34.
24. Callaghan J.J., Squire M.W., Goetz D.D., et al. Cemented rotating-platform total knee replacement. A nine to twelve-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2000, 82A:705.
25. Christensen N.O. Unicompartmental prosthesis for gonarthrosis. A nine-year series of 575 knees from a Swedish hospital. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1991, 273:165.
26. Charnley J. Low friction arthroplasty of the hip: theory and practice 1979, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
27. Zaki S.H., Rafiq I., Kapoor A., et al. Medium-term results with the Press Fit Condylar (PFC) Sigma knee prosthesis the Wrightington experience. Acta Orthop Belg 2007, 73:55.
28. Evans M.C., Parsons E.M., Scott R.D., et al. Comparative flexion after rotating-platform vs fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2006, 21:985.
29. Bellamy N., Buchman W., Goldsmith C.H., et al. Validation study of WOMAC: health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relvantoutcomes to antirheumatic drugtherapyin patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and the knee. J Rheumatol 1988, 15:1833.
30. Amstutz H.C., Thomas B.J., Jinnah R. Treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the hip: a comparison of total joint and surface replacement arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1984, 66:228.
31. Ware J.E., Kosinski M., Keller S.D. SF-12: how to score the SF-12 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales 1995, The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, Boston. 2nd ed.
32. Dawson J., Fitzpatrick R., Carr A.J., et al. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996, 78B:185.
33. Mahomed N.N., Liang M.H., Cook E.F., et al. The importance of patient expectations in predicting functional outcomes after total joint arthroplasty. J Rheumatol 2002, 29:1273.
34. Ewald F.C. The Knee Society Total Knee Arthroplasty Roentgenographic Evaluation and Scoring System. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989, 248:9.
35. Gill G.S., Joshi A.B., Mills D.M. Total condylar knee arthroplasty: 16- to 21-year results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1999, 367:210.
36. Colizza W.A., Insall J.N., Scuderi G.R. 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.
37. Font-Rodriguez D.E., Scuderi G.R., Insall J.N. Survivorship of cemented total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997, 345:79.
38. Callaghan J.J. Mobile bearing knee replacement: clinical results-a review of the literature. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001, 392:221.
39. Kim Y.H., Kim D.Y., Kim J.S. Simultaneous mobile and fixed-bearing total knee replacement in the same patients: a prospective comparison of mid-term outcomes using a similar design of prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007, 89B:904.
40. Woolson S.T., Northrop G.D. Mobile vs fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiologic study. J Arthroplasty 2004, 19:135.
41. Wohlrab D., Ditl J., Herrschelmann R., et al. Does the Nexgen LPS flex mobile knee prosthesis offer advantages compared to the Nexgen LPS: a comparison of clinical and radiographic results. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 2005, 143:567.
42. Buechel F.F., Beuchel F.F., Pappas M.J., et al. Twenty-year evaluation of meniscal bearing and rotating platform knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001, 388:41.
43. Haas B.D., Komistek R.D., Dennis D.A. In vivo kinematics of the low contact stress rotating platform total knee. Orthopedics 2002, 25(Suppl 2):219.
44. Banks S., Bellemans J., Nozaki H., et al. Knee motions during maximum flexion in fixed and mobile-bearing arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003, 410:131.
45. Dennis D.A., Komistek R.D., Stiehl J.B., et al. Range of motion after total knee arthroplasty: the effect of implant design and weight-bearing conditions. J Arthroplasty 1998, 13:748.
46. Steihl J.B., Voorhorst P.E. Total knee arthroplasty with a mobile-bearing prosthesis: comparison of retention and sacrifice of the posterior cruciate ligament in cementless implants. Am J Ortho 1999, 28:223.
47. Pagnano M.W., Trousdale R.T., Stuart M.J., et al. Rotating platform knees did not improve patellar tracking: a prospective randomized study of 240 primary total knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004, 428:221.
48. Ranawat A.S., Rossi R., Loreti I., et al. Comparison of the Sigma fixed-bearing and rotating-platform total knee arthroplasty in the same patient. J Arthroplasty 2004, 19:35.
49. Matsuda S., Whiteside L.A., White S.E., et al. Knee stability in meniscal bearing total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1999, 14:82.
50. Sorrells R.B. The rotating platform mobile bearing TKA. Orthopedics 1996, 19:793.