Kim Y-H, Kim D-Y, Kim J-S
The Joint Replacement Center of Korea, Ewha Womans University, ChongRo 6-Ga, ChongRo-Gu, Seoul 110-783, Korea.
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007 Jul;89(7):904-10. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B7.18635.
We conducted a randomised prospective study to evaluate the clinical and radiological results of a mobile- and fixed-bearing total knee replacement of similar design in 174 patients who had bilateral simultaneous knee replacement. The mean follow-up was for 5.6 years (5.2 to 6.1). The total knee score, pain score, functional score and range of movement were not statistically different (p > 0.05) between the two groups. Osteolysis was not seen in any knee in either group. Two knees (1%) in the mobile-bearing group required revision because of infection; none in the fixed-bearing group needed revision. Excellent results can be achieved with both mobile- and fixed-bearing prostheses of similar design at mid-term follow-up. We could demonstrate no significant clinical advantage for a mobile bearing.
我们进行了一项随机前瞻性研究，以评估174例双侧同时进行膝关节置换的患者中，采用类似设计的活动型和固定型全膝关节置换术的临床和影像学结果。平均随访时间为5.6年（5.2至6.1年）。两组之间的全膝关节评分、疼痛评分、功能评分和活动范围无统计学差异（p>0.05）。两组中任何膝关节均未出现骨溶解。活动型假体组有两例膝关节（1%）因感染需要翻修；固定型假体组无一例需要翻修。在中期随访中，采用类似设计的活动型和固定型假体均可取得优异的结果。我们未能证明活动型假体具有显著的临床优势。
