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
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 1/2012

01-01-2012 | Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

No Long-term Difference Between Fixed and Mobile Medial Unicompartmental Arthroplasty

Authors: Sebastien Parratte, MD, Vanessa Pauly, MS, Jean-Manuel Aubaniac, MD, Jean-Noel A. Argenson, MD

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 1/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Early studies in the literature reported relatively high early minor reintervention rate for the mobile-bearing unilateral knee arthroplasty (UKA) compared with short- and midterm survivorship after fixed- or mobile-bearing UKA. However, whether the long-term function and survivorship are similar is unclear.

Questions/purposes

We therefore asked whether (1) mobile- or fixed-bearing UKAs have comparable function (as measured by the Knee Society scores); (2) mobile- and fixed-bearing UKA have comparable Knee Society radiographic scores; and (3) the long-term survivorship is comparable.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 75 patients (79 knees) with a fixed-bearing UKA and 72 patients (77 knees) with a mobile-bearing UKA operated on between 1989 and 1992. Mean age of the patients was 63 years; gender and body mass index (26 kg/m2) were comparable in the two groups. We obtained Knee Society function and radiographic scores and determined survival. The minimum followup was 15 years (mean, 17.2 ± 4.8 years; range, 15–21.2 years).

Results

The mean Knee Society function and knee scores were comparable in the two groups. Radiographically, the number of overcorrections and the number of radiolucencies were statistically higher in the mobile-bearing group (69% versus 24%). At final followup, considering revision for any reason, 12 of 77 (15%) UKAs were revised (for aseptic loosening, dislocation, and arthritis progression) in the mobile-bearing group and 10 of 79 (12%) in the fixed-bearing group (for wear and arthritis progression).

Conclusions

This long-term study did not demonstrate any difference in survivorship between fixed and mobile-bearing but pointed out specific modes of failure.

Level of Evidence

Level III, comparative study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Literature
1.
Ahlback S. Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1968;Suppl 277:7–72.
2.
Argenson JN, Chevrol-Benkeddache Y, Aubaniac JM. Modern unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with cement: a three to ten-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:2235–2239.PubMed
3.
Argenson JN, Komistek RD, Aubaniac JM, Dennis DA, Northcut EJ, Anderson DT, Agostini S. In vivo determination of knee kinematics for subjects implanted with a unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17:1049–1054.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Argenson JN, O’Connor JJ. Polyethylene wear in meniscal knee replacement. A one to nine-year retrieval analysis of the Oxford knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992;74:228–232.PubMed
5.
Argenson JN, Parratte S. The unicompartmental knee: design and technical considerations in minimizing wear. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;452:137–142.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Berger RA, Meneghini RM, Jacobs JJ, Sheinkop MB, Della Valle CJ, Rosenberg AG, Galante JO. Results of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years of follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:999–1006.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Bonutti PM, Dethmers DA. Contemporary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: fixed vs mobile bearing. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:24–27.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Clark M, Campbell DG, Kiss G, Dobson PJ, Lewis PL. Reintervention after mobile-bearing Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:576–580.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Confalonieri N, Manzotti A, Pullen C. Comparison of a mobile with a fixed tibial bearing unicompartmental knee prosthesis: a prospective randomized trial using a dedicated outcome score. Knee. 2004;11:357–362.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Cooke D, Scudamore A, Li J, Wyss U, Bryant T, Costigan P. Axial lower-limb alignment: comparison of knee geometry in normal volunteers and osteoarthritis patients. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 1997;5:39–47.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Emerson RH Jr, Hansborough T, Reitman RD, Rosenfeldt W, Higgins LL. Comparison of a mobile with a fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee implant. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;404:62–70.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Emerson RH Jr, Higgins LL. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the Oxford prosthesis in patients with medial compartment arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:118–122.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Gibson PH, Goodfellow JW. Stress radiography in degenerative arthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1986;68:608–609.PubMed
14.
Gleeson RE, Evans R, Ackroyd CE, Webb J, Newman JH. Fixed or mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacement? A comparative cohort study. Knee. 2004;11:379–384.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Goodfellow JW, O’Connor J. Clinical results of the Oxford knee: surface arthroplasty of the tibiofemoral joint with a meniscal bearing prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986;205:21–42.PubMed
16.
Goodfellow JW, Tibrewal SB, Sherman KP, O’Connor JJ. Unicompartmental Oxford meniscal knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1987;2:1–9.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Insall J, Walker P. Unicondylar knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976;120:83–85.PubMed
18.
Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;248:13–14.PubMed
19.
Kaplan E, Meier P. Nonparametric observation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc. 1958;53:457–481.CrossRef
20.
Kennedy WR, White RP. Unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee. Postoperative alignment and its influence on overall results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987;221:278–285.PubMed
21.
Komistek RD, Allain J, Anderson DT, Dennis DA, Goutallier D. In vivo kinematics for subjects with and without an anterior cruciate ligament. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;404:315–325.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Koskinen E, Eskelinen A, Paavolainen P, Pulkkinen P, Remes V. 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. 2008;79:499–507.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Koskinen E, Paavolainen P, Eskelinen A, Pulkkinen P, Remes V. Unicondylar knee replacement for primary osteoarthritis: a prospective follow-up study of 1,819 patients from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop. 2007;78:128–135.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Lewold S, Goodman S, Knutson K, Robertsson O, Lidgren L. Oxford meniscal bearing knee versus the Marmor knee in unicompartmental arthroplasty for arthrosis. A Swedish multicenter survival study. J Arthroplasty. 1995;10:722–731.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Li MG, Yao F, Joss B, Ioppolo J, Nivbrant B, Wood D. Mobile vs fixed-bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a randomized study on short term clinical outcomes and knee kinematics. Knee. 2006;13:365–370.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ. The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:983–989.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Naudie D, Guerin J, Parker DA, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH. Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the Miller-Galante prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:1931–1935.PubMed
28.
O’Rourke MR, Gardner JJ, Callaghan JJ, Liu SS, Goetz DD, Vittetoe DA, Sullivan PM, Johnston RC. The John Insall Award: unicompartmental knee replacement: a minimum twenty-one-year followup, end-result study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;440:27–37.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Ornetti P, Parratte S, Gossec L, Tavernier C, Argenson JN, Roos EM, Guillemin F, Maillefert JF. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the French version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) in knee osteoarthritis patients. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2007;16:423–428.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Parratte S, Argenson JN, Pearce O, Pauly V, Auquier P, Aubaniac JM. Medial unicompartmental knee replacement in the under-50s. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91:351–356.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Patil S, Colwell CW Jr, Ezzet KA, D’Lima DD. Can normal knee kinematics be restored with unicompartmental knee replacement? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:332–338.PubMedCrossRef
32.
33.
Price AJ, Waite JC, Svard U. Long-term clinical results of the medial Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;435:171–180.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Robertsson O, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L. The routine of surgical management reduces failure after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83:45–49.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Robertsson O, Lidgren L. The short-term results of 3 common UKA implants during different periods in Sweden. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:801–807.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Scott RD. Three decades of experience with unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: mistakes made and lessons learned. Orthopedics. 2006;29:829–831.PubMed
37.
Scott RD. Mobile- versus fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Instr Course Lect. 2010;59:57–60.PubMed
38.
Smith TO, Hing CB, Davies L, Donell ST. Fixed versus mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacement: a meta-analysis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2009;95:599–605.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Svard UC, Price AJ. Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A survival analysis of an independent series. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83:191–194.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Vorlat P, Putzeys G, Cottenie D, Van Isacker T, Pouliart N, Handelberg F, Casteleyn PP, Gheysen F, Verdonk R. The Oxford unicompartmental knee prosthesis: an independent 10-year survival analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006;14:40–45.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Whittaker JP, Naudie DD, McAuley JP, McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ, Bourne RB. Does bearing design influence midterm survivorship of unicompartmental arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:73–81.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
No Long-term Difference Between Fixed and Mobile Medial Unicompartmental Arthroplasty
Authors
Sebastien Parratte, MD
Vanessa Pauly, MS
Jean-Manuel Aubaniac, MD
Jean-Noel A. Argenson, MD
Publication date
01-01-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 1/2012
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-1961-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2012

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 1/2012 Go to the issue

Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of the Knee Society

All-polyethylene and Metal-backed Tibial Components Are Equivalent With BMI of Less Than 37.5

Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

Improved Accuracy of Alignment With Patient-specific Positioning Guides Compared With Manual Instrumentation in TKA

Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

Is There a Preferred Articulating Spacer Technique for Infected Knee Arthroplasty?: A Preliminary Study

Clinical Research

Incidence of Deep Vein Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism after Achilles Tendon Rupture

Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

Unicompartmental Versus Total Knee Arthroplasty Database Analysis: Is There a Winner?

Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

Decreased Length of Stay After TKA Is Not Associated With Increased Readmission Rates in a National Medicare Sample