Mobile- versus fixed-bearing modern total knee replacements – which is the more patella-friendly design?

Objectives

Our study aimed to examine if a mobile-bearing total knee replacement (TKR) offered an advantage over fixed-bearing designs with respect to rates of secondary resurfacing of the patella in knees in which it was initially left unresurfaced.

Methods

We examined the 11-year report of the New Zealand Joint Registry and identified all primary TKR designs that had been implanted in > 500 knees without primary resurfacing of the patella. We examined how many of these were mobile-bearing, fixed-bearing cruciate-retaining and fixed-bearing posterior-stabilised designs. We assessed the rates of secondary resurfacing of the patella for each group and constructed Kaplan-Meier survival curves.

Results

Our study showed a significantly higher rate of revision for secondary resurfacing of the patella in the fixed-bearing posterior-stabilised TKR designs compared with either fixed-bearing cruciate-retaining or mobile-bearing designs (p = 0.001 and p = 0.036, respectively).

Conclusions

This New Zealand Registry study shows that during the last 11 years, revision procedures to resurface an unresurfaced patella in primary TKR occurred at a higher rate in fixed-bearing posterior-stabilised designs.