Fixed- versus Mobile-Bearing Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Trial With a Minimum of 10-Year Follow-Up.
Konstantinos Tsikopoulos, Konstantinos Kazamias, Paul White et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This randomized trial compared fixed- and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthrosis in 207 patients, assessing patient-reported outcomes and complications. Fixed-bearing implants had a statistically higher Oxford Knee Score at 2 years (mean difference 3.6; 95% confidence interval: 0.51 to 6.69, P = 0.0226), but the authors judged the difference not clinically meaningful. Patient-reported outcomes did not differ significantly at 10 years, and reoperation rates showed no significant difference over follow-up extending to 19 years (risk ratio 1.51 (95% confidence interval: 0.79 to 2.87, P = 0.2096)).
Key findings
- At 2 years, the Oxford Knee Score favored fixed-bearing TKA (mean difference 3.6; 95% confidence interval: 0.51 to 6.69, P = 0.0226), without a clinically meaningful difference.
- Patient-reported outcomes did not differ significantly between groups at 10 years.
- Reoperation rates did not differ significantly through 19 years (risk ratio 1.51 (95% confidence interval: 0.79 to 2.87, P = 0.2096)).
Why it matters
The trial addresses whether bearing design produces durable differences in outcomes after total knee arthroplasty. Its findings suggest that the early statistical advantage in Oxford Knee Score for fixed-bearing implants did not translate into a clinically meaningful difference, while long-term patient-reported outcomes and reoperations were similar. This helps frame bearing choice without implying superiority of either design.
What to keep in mind
The abstract does not report 10-year outcome estimates or detailed follow-up completeness, limiting assessment of the precision and robustness of long-term comparisons.