4.6 Article

Rotaglide Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Long-Term Follow-up Study

Journal

JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME
Volume 93A, Issue 9, Pages 878-884

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.I.01702

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Mobile-bearing knee designs represent an alternative to conventional fixed-bearing implants in total knee arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical results of a mobile-bearing knee implant. Methods: From 1990 to 1998, 326 primary consecutive mobile-bearing total knee prostheses were implanted in 260 patients who had a mean age and standard deviation of 66.7 +/- 6.9 years. Femoral and tibial components were cemented in all knees, and the patella was resurfaced in 199 knees (61%). Patients were evaluated with the use of the Knee Society clinical rating system and radiographic examinations. Complications were noted, and survivorship of the prostheses was determined. Results: The mean follow-up period was 156 +/- 27.3 months, with maximum follow-up at eighteen years. The mean Knee Society knee score improved from 32.4 +/- 21.2 preoperatively to 92.6 +/- 10.0 at the time of the last follow-up (p = 0.00), and the mean Knee Society functional score improved from 39.3 +/- 18.7 preoperatively to 66.7 +/- 18.6 at the time of the last follow-up (p = 0.00). Mean knee flexion improved from 92.3 degrees +/- 14.5 degrees preoperatively to 112.1 degrees +/- 13.4 degrees at the time of the last follow-up (p = 0.00). There were twenty-four (7.4%) knees that required revision. In eighteen (5.5%) knees, worn out or broken polyethylene,was found and a polyethylene-only exchange was done. Six knees (1.8%) were fully revised. The survival rate was 0.96 (95% confidence interval, 0.93 to 0.98) at ten years and 0.87 (95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 0.93) at eighteen years. Conclusions: A fully congruent, mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis had excellent survivorship during the ten to eighteen-year follow-up interval.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available