Orthopedics and Traumatology Unit, San Giovanni Bosco Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Ann Transl Med. 2016 Apr;4(7):127. doi: 10.21037/atm.2015.12.64.
The mobile bearing (MB) concept in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was developed as an alternative to fixed bearing (FB) implants in order to reduce wear and improve range of motion (ROM), especially focused on younger patients. Unfortunately, its theoretical advantages are still controversial. In this paper we exhibit a review of the more recent literature available comparing FB and MB designs in biomechanical and clinical aspects, including observational studies, clinical trials, national and international registries analyses, randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses and Cochrane reviews. Except for some minor aspects, none of the studies published so far has reported a significant improvement related to MBs regarding patient satisfaction, clinical, functional and radiological outcome or medium and long-term survivorship. Thus the presumed superiority of MBs over FBs appears largely inconsistent. The routine use of MB is not currently supported by adequate evidences; implant choice should be therefore made on the basis of other factors, including cost and surgeon experience.
在全膝关节置换术 (TKA) 中,移动轴承 (MB) 概念的提出是为了替代固定轴承 (FB) 植入物,以减少磨损并改善活动范围 (ROM),特别是针对年轻患者。不幸的是,其理论优势仍存在争议。在本文中,我们展示了对生物力学和临床方面的最新文献的综述,包括观察性研究、临床试验、国家和国际登记分析、随机对照试验、荟萃分析和 Cochrane 综述,比较了 FB 和 MB 设计。到目前为止,除了一些次要方面,还没有一项研究报道 MB 与患者满意度、临床、功能和影像学结果或中远期生存率相关的显著改善。因此,MB 优于 FB 的假设在很大程度上并不一致。MB 的常规使用目前没有得到充分证据的支持;因此,植入物的选择应基于其他因素,包括成本和外科医生的经验。