Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 11/2013

01-11-2013 | Knee

Fixed- versus mobile-bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: are failure modes different?

Authors: Tao Cheng, Daoyun Chen, Chen Zhu, Xiaoyun Pan, Xin Mao, Yongyuan Guo, Xianlong Zhang

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 11/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

An ongoing controversy exists on whether mobile-bearing design is superior over fixed-bearing design in unicondylar knee arthroplasties (UKAs). The present study conducted a systematic review to ascertain differences in performance between fixed- and mobile-bearing designs in UKAs.

Methods

A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library. A total of 9 comparative studies involving 915 knees comparing outcomes of mobile-bearing UKAs with fixed-bearing UKAs were included in the current analysis. Outcomes of interest included knee function, quality of life, radiographic outcomes, reasons and incidence of reoperation, timing of failures, and survivorship.

Results

The results presented no significant differences between the two designs in terms of knee scores, range of motion, limb alignment, implant positioning, incidence of radiolucent lines and overall reoperation rates. However, their differences have been noted in their modes and timing of failures. Early failures are related to the risk of bearing dislocation in the mobile-bearing design. In contrast, later failures are related to the risk of polyethylene wear in the fixed-bearing design.

Conclusions

The available evidence has not confirmed the advantage of mobile-bearing UKAs over fixed-bearing UKAs but pointed out specific modes of failure.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic study (systematic review and meta-analysis), Level III.
Literature
1.
Argenson JN, Komistek RD, Aubaniac JM, Dennis DA, Northcut EJ, Anderson DT, Agostini S (2002) In vivo determination of knee kinematics for subjects implanted with a unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 17:1049–1154PubMedCrossRef
2.
Ashraf T, Newman JH, Desai VV, Beard D, Nevelos JE (2004) Polyethylene wear in a non-congruous unicompartmental knee replacement: a retrieval analysis. Knee 11:177–181PubMedCrossRef
3.
Bhattacharya R, Scott CE, Morris HE, Wade F, Nutton RW (2012) Survivorship and patient satisfaction of a fixed bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty incorporating an all-polyethylene tibial component. Knee 19:348–351PubMedCrossRef
4.
Bonutti PM, Dethmers DA (2008) Contemporary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: fixed vs mobile bearing. J Arthroplasty 23(7 Suppl):24–27PubMedCrossRef
5.
Borus T, Thornhill T (2008) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 16:9–18PubMed
6.
Brockett CL, Jennings LM, Fisher J (2011) The wear of fixed and mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacements. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 225:511–519PubMedCrossRef
7.
Catani F, Benedetti MG, Bianchi L, Marchionni V, Giannini S, Leardini A (2012) Muscle activity around the knee and gait performance in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty patients: a comparative study on fixed- and mobile-bearing designs. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthros 20:1042–1048CrossRef
8.
Catier C, Turcat M, Jacquel A, Baulot E (2011) The Unispacer™ unicompartmental knee implant: its outcomes in medial compartment knee osteoarthritis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 97:410–417PubMedCrossRef
9.
Confalonieri N, Manzotti A, Pullen C (2004) Comparison of a mobile with a fixed tibial bearing unicompartmental knee prosthesis: a prospective randomized trial using a dedicated outcome score. Knee 11:357–362PubMedCrossRef
10.
11.
Dervin GF, Carruthers C, Feibel RJ, Giachino AA, Kim PR, Thurston PR (2011) Initial experience with the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 26:192–197PubMedCrossRef
12.
Deschamps G, Chol C (2011) Fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Patients’selection and operative technique. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 97:648–661PubMedCrossRef
13.
Deshmukh RV, Scott RD (2001) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: long-term results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 392:272–278PubMedCrossRef
14.
Eillison PJ, Traynor A, Casey BP, Collins SN (2011) Wear of a mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacement prosthesis: a comparison of in vitro and in vivo wear rates. J ASTM Int 8:1–6
15.
Emerson RH Jr, Head WC, Peters PC Jr (1992) Soft-tissue balance and alignment in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 74:807–810PubMed
16.
Emerson RH, Hansborough T, Reitman RD, Rosenfeldt W, Higgins LL (2002) Comparison of a mobile with a fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee implant. Clin Orthop Relat Res 404:62–70PubMedCrossRef
17.
Felts E, Parratte S, Pauly V, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN (2010) Function and quality of life following medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients 60 years of age or younger. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 96:861–867PubMedCrossRef
18.
Foote JA, Smith HK, Jonas SC, Greenwood R, Weale AE (2010) Return to work following knee arthroplasty. Knee 17:19–22PubMedCrossRef
19.
Furnes O, Espehaug B, Lie SA, Vollset SE, Engesaeter LB, Havelin LI (2007) Failure mechanisms after unicompartmental and tricompartmental primary knee replacement with cement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:519–525PubMedCrossRef
20.
Geneletti S, Richardson S, Best N (2009) Adjusting for selection bias in retrospective, case-control studies. Biostatistics 10:17–31PubMedCrossRef
21.
Gleeson RE, Evans R, Ackroyd CE, Webb J, Newman JH (2004) Fixed or mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacement? A comparative cohort study. Knee 11:379–384PubMedCrossRef
22.
Goodfellow JW, Tibrewal SB, Sherman KP, O’Connor JJ (1987) Unicompartmental Oxford Meniscal knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2:1–9PubMedCrossRef
23.
Gulati A, Chau R, Pandit HG, Gray H, Price AJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2009) The incidence of physiological radiolucency following Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement and its relationship to outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91:896–902PubMed
24.
Heyse TJ, Khefacha A, Peersman G, Cartier P (2012) Survivorship of UKA in the middle-aged. Knee 19:585–591PubMedCrossRef
25.
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327:557–560PubMedCrossRef
26.
Jeer PJ, Cossey AJ, Keene GC (2005) Haemoglobin levels following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: influence of transfusion practice and surgical approach. Knee 12:358–361PubMedCrossRef
27.
Johnson S, Jones P, Newman JH (2007) The survivorship and results of total knee replacements converted from unicompartmental knee replacements. Knee 14:154–157PubMedCrossRef
28.
Kalra S, Smith TO, Berko B, Walton NP (2011) Assessment of radiolucent lines around the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement: sensitivity and specificity for loosening. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:777–781PubMed
29.
Kendrick BJ, Longino D, Pandit H, Svard U, Gill HS, Dodd CA, Murray DW, Price AJ (2010) Polyethylene wear in Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement: a retrieval study of 47 bearings. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92:367–373PubMed
30.
Kennedy WR, White RP (1987) Unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee. Postoperative alignment and its influence on overall results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 221:278–285PubMed
31.
Koskinen E, Eskelinen A, Paavolainen P, Pulkkinen P, Remes V (2008) Comparison of survival and cost-effectiveness between unicondylar arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty in patients with primary osteoarthritis: a follow-up study of 50,493 knee replacements from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 79:499–507PubMedCrossRef
32.
Koskinen E, Paavolainen P, Eskelinen A, Pulkkinen P, Remes V (2007) Unicondylar knee replacement for primary osteoarthritis: a prospective follow-up study of 1,819 patients from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 78:128–135PubMedCrossRef
33.
Kozinn SC, Scott R (1989) Unicondylar knee arthroplasty: current concepts review. J Bone Joint Surg Am 71:145–150PubMed
34.
Kretzer JP, Jakubowitz E, Reinders J, Lietz E, Moradi B, Hofmann K, Sonntag R (2011) Wear analysis of unicondylar mobile bearing and fixed bearing knee systems: a knee simulator study. Acta Biomater 7:710–715PubMedCrossRef
35.
Labek G, Sekyra K, Pawelka W, Janda W, Stöckl B (2011) Outcome and reproducibility of data concerning the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a structured literature review including arthroplasty registry data. Acta Orthop 82:131–135PubMedCrossRef
36.
Laurencin CT, Zelicof SB, Scott RD, Ewald FC (1991) Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty in the same patient. A comparative study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 273:151–156PubMed
37.
Levine WN, Ozuna RM, Scott RD, Thornhill TS (1996) Conversion of failed modern unicompartmental arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 11:797–801PubMedCrossRef
38.
Lewold S, Goodman S, Knutson K, Robertsson O, Lidgren L (1995) Oxford meniscal bearing knee versus the Marmor knee in unicompartmental arthroplasty for arthrosis. A Swedish multicenter survival study. J Arthroplasty 10:722–731PubMedCrossRef
39.
Li MG, Yao F, Ioppolo J, Nivbrant B, Wood D (2006) Mobile vs. fixed bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a randomized study on short-term clinical outcomes and knee kinematics. Knee 13:365–370PubMedCrossRef
40.
Lindstrand A, Stenström A, Lewold S (1992) Multicenter study of unicompartmental knee revision. PCA, Marmor, and St Georg compared in 3,777 cases of arthrosis. Acta Orthop Scand 63:256–259PubMedCrossRef
41.
Lisowski LA, van den Bekerom MP, Pilot P, van Dijk CN, Lisowski AE (2011) Oxford Phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: medium-term results of a minimally invasive surgical procedure. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:277–284PubMedCrossRef
42.
Maduekwe UI, Zywiel MG, Bonutti PM, Johnson AJ, Delanois RE, Mont MA (2010) Scientific evidence for the use of modern unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Expert Rev Med Devices 7:219–239PubMedCrossRef
43.
Manson TT, Kelly NH, Lipman JD, Wright TM, Westrich GH (2010) Unicondylar knee retrieval analysis. J Arthroplasty 25(6 Suppl):108–111PubMedCrossRef
44.
McEwen HM, Barnett PI, Bell CJ, Farrar R, Auger DD, Stone MH, Fisher J (2005) The influence of design, materials and kinematics on the in vitro wear of total knee replacements. J Biomech 38:357–365PubMedCrossRef
45.
McEwen HM, Fisher J, Goldsmith AA, Auger DD, Hardaker C, Stone MH (2001) Wear of fixed bearing and rotating platform mobile bearing knees subjected to high levels of internal and external tibial rotation. J Mater Sci Mater Med 12:1049–1052PubMedCrossRef
46.
Newman JH, Ackroyd CE, Shah NA (1998) Unicompartmental or total knee replacement? Five-year results of a prospective, randomised trial of 102 osteoarthritic knees with unicompartmental arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:862–865PubMedCrossRef
47.
Newman J, Pydisetty RV, Ackroyd C (2009) Unicompartmental or total knee replacement: the 15-year results of a prospective randomised controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91:52–57PubMedCrossRef
48.
Palmer SH, Morrison P, Ross AC (1998) Early catastrophic tibial component wear after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 350:143–148PubMedCrossRef
49.
Pandit H, Jenkins C, Gill HS, Smith G, Price AJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2011) Unnecessary contraindications for mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:622–628PubMed
50.
Panni AS, Vasso M, Cerciello S, Felici A (2012) Unicompartmental knee replacement provides early clinical and functional improvement stabilizing over time. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20:579–585PubMedCrossRef
51.
Parratte S, Pauly V, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN (2012) No long-term difference between fixed and mobile medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:61–68PubMedCrossRef
52.
Patil S, Colwell CW Jr, Ezzet KA, D’Lima DD (2005) Can normal knee kinematics be restored with unicompartmental knee replacement? J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:332–338PubMedCrossRef
53.
Price AJ, Short A, Kellett C, Beard D, Gill H, Pandit H, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2005) Ten-year in vivo wear measurement of a fully congruent mobile bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:1493–1497PubMed
54.
Price AJ, Svard U (2011) A second decade lifetable survival analysis of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:174–179PubMedCrossRef
55.
Price AJ, Waite JC, Svard U (2005) Long-term clinical results of the medial Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 435:171–180PubMedCrossRef
56.
Robertsson O, Borgguist L, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L (1999) Use of unicompartmental instead of tricompartmental prostheses for unicompartmental arthrosis in the knee is a cost-effective alternative. 15,437 primary tricompartmental prostheses were compared with 10,624 primary medial or lateral unicompartmental prostheses. Acta Orthop Scand 70:170–175PubMedCrossRef
57.
Robertsson O, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L (2001) The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register 1975–1997: an update with special emphasis on 41,223 knees operated on in 1988–1997. Acta Orthop Scand 72:503–513PubMedCrossRef
58.
Robertsson O, Lidgren L (2008) The short-term results of 3 common UKA implants during different periods in Sweden. J Arthroplasty 23:801–807PubMedCrossRef
59.
Saenz CL, McGrath MS, Marker DR, Seyler TM, Mont MA, Bonutti PM (2010) Early failure of a unicompartmental knee arthroplasty design with an all-polyethylene tibial component. Knee 17:53–56PubMedCrossRef
60.
Saldanha KA, Keys GW, Svard UC, White SH, Rao C (2007) Revision of Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty: results of a multicentre study. Knee 14:275–279PubMedCrossRef
61.
Sathasivam S, Walker PS, Campbell PA, Rayner K (2001) The effect of contact area on wear in relation to fixed bearing and mobile bearing knee replacements. J Biomed Mater Res 58:282–290PubMedCrossRef
62.
Schallberger A, Jacobi M, Wahl P, Maestretti G, Jakob RP (2011) High tibial valgus osteotomy in unicompartmental medial osteoarthritis of the knee: a retrospective follow-up study over 13–21 years. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:122–127PubMedCrossRef
63.
Smith TO, Hing CB, Davies L, Donell ST (2009) Fixed versus mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacement: a meta-analysis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 95:599–605PubMedCrossRef
64.
Soohoo NF, Sharifi H, Kominski G, Lieberman JR (2006) Cost-effectiveness analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty as an alternative to total knee arthroplasty for unicompartmental osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:1975–1982PubMedCrossRef
65.
Sun PF, Jia YH (2012) Mobile bearing UKA compared to fixed bearing TKA: a randomized prospective study. Knee 19:103–106PubMedCrossRef
66.
W-Dahl A, Robertsson O, Lidgren L, Miller L, Davidson D, Graves S (2010) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients aged less than 65. Acta Orthop 81:90–94PubMedCrossRef
67.
Whittaker JP, Naudie DD, McAuley JP, McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ, Bourne RB (2010) Does bearing design influence midterm survivorship of unicompartmental arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:73–81PubMedCrossRef
68.
Wright JG, Swiontkowski MF, Heckman JD (2003) Introducing levels of evidence to the journal. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:1–3PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Fixed- versus mobile-bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: are failure modes different?
Authors
Tao Cheng
Daoyun Chen
Chen Zhu
Xiaoyun Pan
Xin Mao
Yongyuan Guo
Xianlong Zhang
Publication date
01-11-2013
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 11/2013
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2208-y

Other articles of this Issue 11/2013

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 11/2013 Go to the issue

Knee

Is bicompartmental knee arthroplasty more favourable to knee muscle strength and physical performance compared to total knee arthroplasty?

Knee

Timing of arthroplasty, what is the influence of nocturnal pain and pain at rest on the outcome?

Knee

An uncommon cause of cemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty failure: fracture of metallic components

Knee

Effect of foot rotation on the mechanical axis and correlation between knee and whole leg radiographs

Knee

No difference in survivorship after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with or without an intact anterior cruciate ligament

Knee

The treatment of acquired patella baja with proximalize the tibial tuberosity