Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A meta-analysis of the fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing prostheses in total knee arthroplasty

  • Orthopaedic Surgery
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

We asked whether the mobile-bearing knee prostheses could offer clinical and radiographic advantages over the fixed-bearing knee prostheses.

Materials and methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the validity of this theory. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1979 to June 2010 for randomized controlled studies comparing the effect of fixed- and mobile-bearing prostheses in TKA. We assessed the methodological quality of the studies and abstracted the relevant data independently.

Results

15 studies involving 1,950 knees were identified in this analysis. No statistically significant difference was present in terms of KSS, patient preference, radiolucent line around implant and prosthesis-related complications as compared to the fixed- and mobile-bearing knee design.

Conclusions

Theoretically, mobile-bearing implant design could improve clinical and radiographic outcomes as being compared to fixed-bearing implant design, but the anticipated effectiveness has not been implemented in the current clinical practice at mid-term follow up.

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

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 Arthroplasty 20:145–153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bartel DL, Bicknell VL, Wright TM (1986) The effect of conformity, thickness, and material on stresses in ultra-high molecular weight components for total joint replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 68:1041–1051

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bellemans J, Banks S, Victor J, Vandenneucker H, Moemans A (2002) Fluoroscopic analysis of the kinematics of deep flexion in total knee arthroplasty. Influence of posterior condylar offset. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84:50–53

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bellemans J, Robijns F, Duerinckx J, Banks S, Vandenneucker H (2005) The influence of tibial slope on maximal flexion after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 13:193–196

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bhan S, Malhotra R, Kiran EK, Shukla S, Bijjawara M (2005) 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 87:2290–2296

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Callaghan JJ, Insall JN, Greenwald AS, Dennis DA, Komistek RD, Murray DW, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, Dorr LD (2001) Mobilebearing replacement: concepts and results. Instr Course Lect 50:431–449

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Callaghan JJ, O’Rourke MR, Iossi MF, Liu SS, Goetz DD, Vittetoe DA, Sullivan PM, Johnston RC (2005) 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 87:1995–1998

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Catani F, Fantozzi S, Ensini A, Leardini A, Moschella D, Giannini S (2006) Influence of tibial component posterior slope on in vivo knee kinematics in fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Res 24:581–587

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Chiu KY, Ng TP, Tang WM, Lam P (2001) Bilateral total knee arthroplasty: one mobile-bearing and one fixed-bearing. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 9:45–50

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dennis DA, Komistek RD, Mahfouz MR, Walker SA, Tucker A (2004) A multicenter analysis of axial femorotibial rotation after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 428:180–189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Engh GA (1988) Failure of the polyethylene bearing surface of a total knee replacement within four years: a case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 70:1093–1096

    Google Scholar 

  12. 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 

  13. Harrington MA, Hopkinson WJ, Hsu P, Manion L (2009) Fixed- vs mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty. Does it make a difference?—A prospective randomized study. J Arthroplasty 24(6 Suppl):24–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hasegawa M, Sudo A, Uchida A (2009) Staged bilateral mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty in the same patients: a prospective comparison of a posterior-stabilized prosthesis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:237–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Huang CH, Ma HM, Liau JJ, Ho FY, Cheng CK (2002) Late dislocation of rotating platform in New Jersey Low-Contact Stress knee prosthesis. Clin Orthop 405:189–194

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jacobs WC, Clement DJ, Wymenga AB (2005) Retention versus sacrifice of the posterior cruciate ligament in total knee replacement for treatment of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 19:CD004803

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17:1–12

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Jordan LR, Olivo JL, Voorhorst PE (1997) Survivorship analysis of cementless meniscal bearing total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 338:119–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kim TK, Chang CB, Kang YG, Chung BJ, Cho HJ, Seong SC (2010) Early clinical outcomes of floating platform mobile-bearing TKA: longitudinal comparison with fixed-bearing TKA. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:879–888

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim YH, Kim DY, Kim JS (2001) Comparison of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 393:101–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 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 Joint Surg Br 89:904–910

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lädermann A, Lübbeke A, Stern R, Riand N, Fritschy D (2008) Fixed-bearing versus mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised, clinical and radiological study with mid-term results at 7 years. Knee 15:206–210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Luring C, Bathis H, Oczipka F, Trepte C, Lufen H, Perlick L, Grifka J (2006) Two-year follow-up on joint stability and muscular function comparing rotating versus fixed bearing TKR. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:605–611

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Massin P, Gournay A (2006) Optimization of the posterior condylar offset, tibial slope, and condylar roll-back in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 21:889–896

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 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 38:357–365

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. O’Connor JJ, Goodfellow JW (1996) Theory and practice of meniscal knee replacement: designing against wear. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 210:217–222

    Google Scholar 

  28. 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 Joint Surg Br 85:62–67

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Ranawat AS, Rossi R, Loreti I, Rasquinha VJ, Rodriguez JA, Ranawat CS (2004) Comparison of the PFC sigma fixed-bearing and rotating-platform total knee arthroplasty in the same patient: short-term results. J Arthroplasty 19:35–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ritter MA (2006) High-flexion knee designs: more hype than hope? In the affirmative. J Arthroplasty 21:40–41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sathasivam S, Walker PS (1994) Optimization of the bearing surface geometry of total knees. J Biomech 27:255–264

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Schurman DJ, Rojer DE (2005) Total knee arthroplasty: range of motion across five systems. Clin Orthop Relat Res 430:132–137

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Shi MG, Lu HS, Guan ZP (2006) Influence of preoperative range of motion on the early clinical outcome of total knee arthroplasty. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 44:1101–1105

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sorrells RB, Primary knee arthroplasty (1996) The rotating platform mobile bearing TKA. Orthopedics 19:793–796

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Watanabe T, Tomita T, Fujii M, Hashimoto J, Sugamoto K, Yoshikawa H (2005) Comparison between mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing knees in bilateral total knee replacements. Int Orthop 29:179–181

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Woolson ST, Northrop GD (2004) Mobile- vs. fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty: a clinical and radiologic study. J Arthroplasty 19:135–140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. 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 Joint Surg Br 90:1172–1179

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Basic Medical College, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China

    Yu Wen

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Shengjing Hospital, China Medical University, 36 Sanhao Road, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, China

    Da Liu, Ying Huang & Bin Li

Authors
  1. Yu Wen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Da Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ying Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bin Li.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wen, Y., Liu, D., Huang, Y. et al. A meta-analysis of the fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing prostheses in total knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 131, 1341–1350 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-011-1328-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-011-1328-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation