0
Scientific Articles   |    
Comparison of Anterior-Posterior-Glide and Rotating-Platform Low Contact Stress Mobile-Bearing Total Knee Arthroplasties
Young-Hoo Kim, MD1; Jun-Shik Kim, MD1
1 The Joint Replacement Center of Korea at Ewha Womans University DongDaeMun Hospital, 70, ChongRo 6-Ga, ChongRo-Gu, Seoul, Korea (110-126). E-mail address for Y.-H. Kim: younghookim@netsgo.com
View Disclosures and Other Information
The authors did not receive grants or outside funding in support of their research or preparation of this manuscript. They did not receive payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors are affiliated or associated.
Investigation performed at The Joint Replacement Center of Korea at Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated
J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2004 Jun 01;86(6):1239-1247
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

Background: The anterior-posterior-glide Low Contact Stress mobile-bearing knee prosthesis was developed to approximate the natural kinematics of the knee more closely than the rotating-platform Low Contact Stress mobile-bearing knee prosthesis does. The purpose of the present study was to compare the results associated with these two prostheses in patients managed with simultaneous bilateral total knee replacement.

Methods: One hundred and ninety patients received an anterior-posterior-glide Low Contact Stress mobile-bearing prosthesis in one knee and a rotating-platform Low Contact Stress mobile-bearing prosthesis in the contralateral knee. The mean age of the patients at the time of the index procedure was sixty-four years. Eleven patients were men, and 179 patients were women. The mean duration of follow-up was 6.4 years (range, five to seven years). The patients were followed clinically and radiographically with use of the knee-rating systems of the Knee Society and the Hospital for Special Surgery.

Results:The mean postoperative Hospital for Special Surgery knee score was 89.4 points for the knees treated with the anterior-posterior-glide mobile-bearing prosthesis and 88.6 points for those treated with the rotating-platform mobile-bearing prosthesis. Three knees in each group had a poor result. Two knees in each group had persistent moderate pain. One knee with an anterior-posterior-glide prosthesis had permanent tibial and deep peroneal nerve palsies, and one knee with a rotating-platform prosthesis had a permanent deep peroneal nerve palsy. No knee had aseptic loosening, revision, measurable wear of the tibial or patellar polyethylene bearing, or osteolysis.

Conclusions: After a minimum duration of follow-up of five years, the results associated with the anterior-posterior-glide and rotating-platform Low Contact Stress mobile-bearing total knee replacements were favorable and comparable.

Level of Evidence: Therapeutic study, Level II-1 (prospective cohort study). See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $35
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

     
    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org

    References

    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe





    Related Content
    The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
    JBJS Case Connector
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    JBJS Jobs
    01/08/2014
    Pennsylvania - Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
    04/16/2014
    Ohio - OhioHealth Research and Innovation Institute (OHRI)