Comparison of Fixed-Bearing and Mobile-Bearing Total Knee Arthroplasties

The purpose of the current study was to directly compare the results of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasties in the same patient who had bilateral simultaneous total knee replacements. A fixed-bearing total knee prosthesis (AMK) was implanted in one knee and a mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis (LCS) was implanted in the other knee in 116 patients. The average age of the patients was 65 years (range, 33–70 years). The average followup was 7.4 years (range, 6–8 years). Clinical and radiographic followup was done using Knee Society and Hospital for Special Surgery knee rating systems at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year after surgery, and yearly thereafter. Total knee score, pain score, mean functional score, and range of motion were comparable in both groups. Two knee replacements (2%) in one patient with AMK prostheses were revised because of complete wear of tibial bearing polyethylene. One knee replacement (1%) in one patient with an LCS prosthesis was revised because of dislocation of the medial tibial bearing polyethylene and one knee replacement (1%) in one patient with an LCS prosthesis was revised because of complete wear of the medial tibial bearing polyethylene. No knee had aseptic loosening or osteolysis in either group. After a minimum followup of 6 years, the results of fixed-and mobile-bearing total knee prostheses in the current series are favorable. However, there is no evidence to prove the superiority of the mobile-bearing total knee design.