Comparison of implant position and joint awareness between fixed- and mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a minimum of five year follow-up study. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 44, 2329–2336 (2020).

Comparison of implant position and joint awareness between fixed- and mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a minimum of five year follow-up study

Kim, M.S., Koh, I.J., Kim, C.K. et al.
Knee

Purpose

To compare the implant position and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) regarding joint awareness using the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) following between fixed-bearing (FB) and mobile-bearing (MB) unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) with a minimum of five years’ follow-up.

Methods

One hundred fifteen consecutive UKAs (58 FB UKAs and 57 MB UKAs) performed were retrospectively evaluated. We compared the radiographic parameters including component positions and relationships as well as lower extremity alignment. Post-operative clinical outcomes were assessed using Knee Society Score (KSS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, Tegner activity score, and FJS.

Results

The MB UKA group showed more convergent componentry relationship between femoral and tibial components (p < 0.001). The joint line of the MB UKA group was restored significantly better (p < 0.05). In addition, the positioning of femoral and tibial components of the MB UKA group showed less deviation from the weight-bearing line (WBL) (p < 0.05). Although there were no differences in KSS, WOMAC, and Tegner activity scores between the groups, the MB UKA group showed significantly better FJS than did the FB UKA group at five years post-operatively (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The MB UKA group had a more convergent componentry relationship, less deviation from WBL, better joint-line restoration, and reduced joint awareness than did the FB UKA group at five years follow-up.


Download article