Mobile-Bearing Total Knee Arthroplasty. A Meta-Analysis

Journal of Arthroplasty

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 537-542

  Carothers, Joshua T ^a,b   Kim, Raymond H ^b   Dennis, Douglas A ^b,c,d,f   Southworth, Carleton ^e  

^a New Mexico Orthopaedic Associates   (Mexico)

^b Ringgold Standard Institution   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^e The Center for Musculoskeletal Research   (United States)

^f Synthes Technical Center   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical results; Knee arthroplasty; Meta analysis; Mobile bearing

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; KNEE INSTABILITY; KNEE MENISCUS; META ANALYSIS; OUTCOME OF EDUCATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PROSTHESIS LOOSENING; RANGE OF MOTION; ROTATION; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT;

ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; JOINT INSTABILITY; KNEE JOINT; KNEE PROSTHESIS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR;

EID: 79955974116     PISSN: 08835403     EISSN: 15328406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.05.015     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Callaghan J.J., Insall J.N., Greenwald A.S., et al. Mobile-bearing knee replacement: concepts and results. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2000, 82:1020.
2. Aglietti P., Baldini A., Buzzi R., et al. Comparison of mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study. J Arthroplasty 2005, 20:145.
3. Beard D.J., Pandit H., Price A.J., et al. Introduction of a new mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis: minimum three year follow-up of an RCT comparing it with a fixed-bearing device. Knee 2007, 14:448.
4. Bhan S., Malhotra R., Kiran E.K., et al. A comparison of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty at a minimum follow-up of 4.5 years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87:2290.
5. 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.
6. Kim Y.H., Yoon S.H., Kim J.S. The long-term results of simultaneous fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee replacements performed in the same patient. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007, 89:1317.
7. 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. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007, 89:904.
8. Price A.J., Rees J.L., Beard D., et al. A mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis compared with a fixed-bearing prosthesis: a multicentre single-blind randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003, 85-B:62.
9. Woolson S.T., Northrop G.D. Mobile-vs. fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiologic study. J Arthroplasty 2004, 19:135.
10. Bourne R.B., Masonis J., Anthony M. An analysis of rotating-platform total knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003, 410:173.
11. Ali M.S., Mangaleshkar S.R. Uncemented rotating-platform total knee arthroplasty: a 4-year to 12-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 2006, 21:80.
12. Papachristou G., Plessas S., Sourlas J., et al. Cementless LCS rotating-platform knee arthroplasty in patients over 60 years without patella replacement: a mid-term clinical-outcome study. Med Sci Monit 2006, 12:CR264.
13. Stiehl 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 Orthop 1999, 28:223.
14. Buechel F.F. Long-term followup after mobile-bearing total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002, 404:40.
15. Callaghan J.J., O'Rourke M.R., Iossi M.F., et al. Cemented rotating-platform total knee replacement. A concise follow-up, at a minimum of fifteen years, of a previous report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87:1995.
16. Diks M.J., Anderson P.G., Janssen J.C., et al. The self-aligning knee prosthesis: clinical and radiological outcome and survival analysis at 5-year follow up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2008, 16:128.
17. Huang C.H., Ma H.M., Lee Y.M., et al. Long-term results of low contact stress mobile-bearing total knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003, 416:265.
18. Jordan L.R., Olivo J.L., Voorhorst P.E. Survivorship analysis of cementless meniscal bearing total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997, 338:119.
19. Kim Y.H., Kim J.S. Comparison of anterior-posterior-glide and rotating-platform low contact stress mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004, 86:1239.
20. Morgan M., Brooks S., Nelson R.A. Total knee arthroplasty in young active patients using a highly congruent fully mobile prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 2007, 22:525.
21. Sharma S., Nicol F., Hullin M.G., et al. Long-term results of the uncemented Low Contact Stress total knee replacement in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005, 87-B:1077.
22. Sorrells R.B., Voorhorst P.E., Murphy J.A., et al. Uncemented rotating-platform total knee replacement: a five to twelve-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004, 86:2156.
23. Tarkin I.S., Bridgeman J.T., Jardon O.M., et al. Successful biologic fixation with mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2005, 20:481.
24. Watanabe T., Tomita T., Fujii M., et al. Comparison between mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing knees in bilateral total knee replacements. Int Orthop 2007, 31:131.
25. Bhan S., Malhotra R. Results of rotating-platform, low-contact-stress knee prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 2003, 18:1016.
26. Sextro G.S., Berry D.J., Rand J.A. Total knee arthroplasty using cruciate-retaining kinematic condylar prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001, 388:33.
27. D'Lima D.D., Chen P.C., Colwell C.W. Polyethylene contact stresses, articular congruity, and knee alignment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001, 392:232.
28. Berger R.A., Rosenberg A.G., Barden R.M., et al. Long-term followup of the Miller-Galante total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001, 388:58.
29. Brassard M.F., Insall J.N., Scuderi G.R., et al. Does modularity affect clinical success? A comparison with a minimum 10-year followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001, 388:26.
30. Engh G.A., Lounici S., Rao A.R., et al. In vivo deterioration of tibial baseplate locking mechanisms in contemporary modular total knee components. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001, 83:1660.
31. Laskin R.S. The Genesis total knee prosthesis: a 10-year followup study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001, 388:95.
32. Ritter M.A., Berend M.E., Meding J.B., et al. Long-term followup of anatomic graduated components posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001, 388:51.
33. 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, 84:1849.
34. Wasielewski R.C., Tomita T., Fujii M., et al. Comparison between mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing knees in bilateral total knee replacements. Int Orthop 2005, 29:179.
35. Dennis D.A., Komistek R.D., Colwell C.E., et al. In vivo anteroposterior femorotibial translation of total knee arthroplasty: a multicenter analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998, 356:46.
36. Insall J.N., Scuderi G.R., Komistek R.D., et al. Correlation between condylar lift-off and femoral component alignment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002, 403:143.
37. Jones V.C., Barton D.C., Fitzpatrick D.P., et al. An experimental model of tibial counterface polyethylene wear in mobile bearing knees: the influence of design and kinematics. Biomed Mater Eng 1999, 9:189.