Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Rotaglide+ total knee replacement: a comparison of mobile versus fixed bearings

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

Mobile-bearing knee replacements were introduced as an alternative to their fixed-bearing counterparts. Movement of the polyethylene insert relative to the tibial tray has been shown to decrease contact stresses, wear and polyethylene-induced osteolysis. The aim of this study is to compare outcomes between mobile and fixed-bearing surfaces of the Rotaglide+ total knee prosthesis.

Methods

A prospective, partially randomised twin cohort study of 149 Rotaglide+ total knee arthroplasties performed in one unit between September 2000 and January 2005, was carried out. The patients were allocated to a mobile or fixed bearing. The patients were assessed using a pain visual analogue score (VAS), the American Knee Surgeons Score (AKSS) the range of movement, the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and walking time. Seventy-five patients had mobile-bearing surfaces, and 74 had fixed bearings.

Results

At 5-year follow–up, there was no significant difference between the fixed- and mobile-bearing implants with respect to range of movement [104.7(SD 17.0) vs. 103.6(SD 15.7) degrees]; AKSS [146.6(SD 23.9) vs. 144.1(SD 32.4)]; VAS [3.3(SD 1.2) vs. 3.4(SD 1.3)]; OKS [30.8(SD 9.7) vs. 29.6(SD 10.9)], respectively.

Conclusion

This study is the first of its kind to outline the medium-term (≥5 years) outcomes in Rotaglide+ total knee replacements. Its findings reinforce previous research which has shown no discernible difference in clinical outcomes between the 2 groups.

Level of evidence

II.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aglietti P, Baldini A, Buzzi R, Lup D, De Luca L (2005) Comparison of mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study. J Arthroplast 20:145–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ball ST, Sanchez HB, Mahoney OM, Schmalzried TP (2011) Fixed versus rotating platform total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, single-blind study. J Arthroplast 26:531–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Buechel FF, Pappas MJ (1986) The New Jersey low-contact-stress knee replacement system: biomechanical rationale and review of the first 123 cemented cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 105:197–204

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dixon MC, Brown RR, Parsch D, Scott RD (2005) Modular fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty with retention of the posterior cruciate ligament. A study of patients followed for a minimum of fifteen years. J Bone Jt Surg Am 87:598–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gill GS, Joshi AB (2001) Long-term results of kinematic condylar knee replacement. An analysis of 404 knees. J Bone Jt Surg Br 83:355–358

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hansson U, Toksvig-Larsen S, Jorn LP, Ryd L (2005) Mobile vs. fixed meniscal bearing in total knee replacement: a randomised radiostereometric study. Knee 12:414–418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ho FY, Ma HM, Liau JJ, Yeh CR, Huang CH (2007) Mobile-bearing knees reduce rotational asymmetric wear. Clin Orthop Relat Res 462:143–149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. KAT Trial Group, Johnston L, MacLennan G, McCormack K, Ramsay C, Walker A (2009) The knee arthroplasty trial (KAT) design features, baseline characteristics, and two-year functional outcomes after alternative approaches to knee replacement. J Bone Jt Surg Am 91:134–141

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kim YH, Kim DY, Kim JS (2007) 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 Jt Surg Br 89:904–910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kim YH, Kim JS (2009) Prevalence of osteolysis after simultaneous bilateral fixed- and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasties in young patients. J Arthroplast 24:932–940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kim YH, Kook HK, Kim JS (2001) Comparison of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 11:101–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kim YH, Yoon SH, Kim JS (2007) The long-term results of simultaneous fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee replacements performed in the same patient. J Bone Jt Surg Br 89:1317–1323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lu YC, Huang CH, Chang TK, Ho FY, Cheng CK, Huang CH (2010) Wear-pattern analysis in retrieved tibial inserts of mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee prostheses. J Bone Jt Surg Br 92:500–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Matsuda S, Mizu-uchi H, Fukagawa S, Miura H, Okazaki K, Matsuda H, Iwamoto Y (2010) Mobile-bearing prosthesis did not improve mid-term clinical results of total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:1311–1316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Matsuda S, White SE, Williams VG II, McCarthy DS, Whiteside LA (1998) Contact stress analysis in meniscal bearing total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 13:699–706

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Price AJ, Rees JL, Beard D, Juszczak E, Carter S, White S, de Steiger R, Dodd CA, Gibbons M, McLardy-Smith P, Goodfellow JW, Murray DW (2003) A mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis compared with a fixed-bearing prosthesis. A multicentre single-blind randomised controlled trial. J Bone Jt Surg Br 85:62–67

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Rao AR, Engh GA, Collier MB, Lounici S (2002) Tibial interface wear in retrieved total knee components and correlations with modular insert motion. J Bone Jt Surg Am 84-A:1849–1855

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rodricks DJ, Patil S, Pulido P, Colwell CW Jr (2007) Press-fit condylar design total knee arthroplasty. Fourteen to seventeen-year follow-up. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89:89–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sawaguchi N, Majima T, Ishigaki T, Mori N, Terashima T, Minami A (2010) Mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty improves patellar tracking and patellofemoral contact stress in vivo measurements in the same patients. J Arthroplast 25:920–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Skwara A, Tibesku CO, Ostermeier S, Stukenborg-Colsman C, Fuchs-Winkelmann S (2009) Differences in patellofemoral contact stresses between mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasties: a dynamic in vitro measurement. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 129:901–907

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Smith H, Jan M, Mahomed NN, Davey JR, Gandhi R (2011) Meta-analysis and systematic review of clinical outcomes comparing mobile bearing and fixed bearing total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 26:1205–1213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Stukenborg-Colsman C, Ostermeier S, Hurschler C, Wirth CJ (2002) Tibiofemoral contact stress after total knee arthroplasty: comparison of fixed and mobile-bearing inlay designs. Acta Orthop Scand 73:638–646

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wylde V, Learmonth I, Potter A, Bettinson K, Lingard E (2008) Patient-reported outcomes after fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee replacement: a multi-centre randomised controlled trial using the kinemax total knee replacement. J Bone Jt Surg Br 90:1172–1179

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None declared.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. St Helens and Knowsley Teaching Hospitals, Merseyside, UK

    Lorcan McGonagle & Ben G. Bolton-Maggs

  2. University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

    Louisa Bethell & Natalie Byrne

  3. 7 Bryanston Road, Liverpool, L17 7AL, UK

    Lorcan McGonagle

Authors
  1. Lorcan McGonagle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Louisa Bethell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Natalie Byrne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ben G. Bolton-Maggs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lorcan McGonagle.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McGonagle, L., Bethell, L., Byrne, N. et al. The Rotaglide+ total knee replacement: a comparison of mobile versus fixed bearings. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22, 1626–1631 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2351-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2351-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation