No significant difference between mobile or fixed bearing total knee prosthesis at 3 years .
Introduction of a new mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis: minimum three year follow-up of an RCT comparing it with a fixed-bearing device
Knee. 2007 Dec;14(6):448-51. Epub 2007 Oct 24This study is a follow-up of a previous randomized trial performed by the same authors. The previous study compared a mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis (TMK) with a fixed-bearing device (ACG) over a 1-year follow-up period. The current study provides an assessment at the 3-year follow-up period. A separate multi-centre cohort receiving the same intervention will also be examined. 40 patients underwent bilateral total knee replacement. Each patient received a mobile-bearing prosthesis (TMK) on one knee and a fixed-bearing prosthesis (ACG) on the other knee. A cohort of 172 patients undergoing unilateral arthroplasty with the TMK was also evaluated for frequency of complications. The results found no significant differences in the clinical assessments between the implant types.
Unlock the Full ACE Report
You have access to 4 more FREE articles this month.
Click below to unlock and view this ACE Reports
Unlock Now
Critical appraisals of the latest, high-impact randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in orthopaedics
Access to OrthoEvidence podcast content, including collaborations with the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviews with internationally recognized surgeons, and roundtable discussions on orthopaedic news and topics
Subscription to The Pulse, a twice-weekly evidence-based newsletter designed to help you make better clinical decisions
Exclusive access to original content articles, including in-house systematic reviews, and articles on health research methods and hot orthopaedic topics
Or upgrade today and gain access to all OrthoEvidencecontent for as little as $1.99 per week.
Already have an account? Log in
0 of 4 monthly FREE articles unlocked
