Fixed- vs mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty: does it make a difference?--a prospective randomized study

J Arthroplasty. 2009 Sep;24(6 Suppl):24-7. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.04.031. Epub 2009 Jun 24.


The purpose of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the early clinical and functional results of primary total knee arthroplasty using a fixed-bearing (FB) and a rotating-platform (RP) prosthesis. Outcomes including range of motion (ROM), Knee Society Score, Western Ontario MacMaster (WOMAC), and Short Form-36 (SF-36) were measured preoperatively and at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. Radiographic analysis was performed. There were 72 FB and 68 RP knees. The RP group had a greater ROM at 6 weeks and 1 year. This difference was not statistically significant at 2 years. There were no differences in the ROM at any other period. There were no significant differences in Knee Society Score, Short Form-36, or Western Ontario MacMaster scores at any period. No clinically significant differences were noted in the radiographic analysis. The use of a FB or RP design did not affect the early functional outcomes after total knee arthroplasty.

Publication types

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / adverse effects
  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / instrumentation*
  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / methods*
  • Biomechanical Phenomena
  • Female
  • Follow-Up Studies
  • Humans
  • Knee Joint / diagnostic imaging
  • Knee Joint / physiology*
  • Knee Joint / surgery
  • Knee Prosthesis* / adverse effects
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Osteoarthritis, Knee / surgery
  • Outcome Assessment, Health Care
  • Prospective Studies
  • Prosthesis Design*
  • Radiography
  • Range of Motion, Articular / physiology*
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Weight-Bearing / physiology