Contemporary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: fixed vs mobile bearing

Contemporary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty has shown resurgence in use partly because of studies reporting excellent long-term survivorship. Both fixed-bearing as well as mobile-bearing designs have shown comparable results. Fixed-bearing designs, in particular, implants with metal-backed tibia...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Journal of arthroplasty Vol. 23; no. 7 Suppl; pp. 24 - 27
Main Authors Bonutti, Peter M, Dethmers, Daniel A
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States 01.10.2008
Subjects
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - instrumentation
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods
Humans
Knee Prosthesis
Metals
Patient Selection
Polyethylenes
Prosthesis Design
Retrospective Studies
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Contemporary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty has shown resurgence in use partly because of studies reporting excellent long-term survivorship. Both fixed-bearing as well as mobile-bearing designs have shown comparable results. Fixed-bearing designs, in particular, implants with metal-backed tibial components have shown more consistent long-term survival, whereas fixed bearings with an all-polyethylene tibial component have had mixed results. Similar to the all-polyethylene tibial component designs, mobile-bearing designs have demonstrated mixed results. One concern with mobile bearings is the high rate of complete tibial radiolucent lines. The keys to long-term survival of both fixed and mobile-bearing designs in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty are patient selection, surgical technique, and surgical experience.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1532-8406
DOI:10.1016/j.arth.2008.06.025