Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Third Affiliated Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Department of Nephrology, NanFang Hospital, Sourthern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, People's Republic of China.
J Knee Surg. 2022 Jan;35(2):135-144. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1713356. Epub 2020 Jun 26.
This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes between mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty (MB-TKA) and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty (FB-TKA) at a minimum 10-year follow-up. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched. All included articles were evaluated by two trained reviewers according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook for potential risk, and the Consolidated Standards on Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist and scoring system was also used to assess the methodological quality of each study. The extracted data included function scores, range of motion (ROM) of the knee, incidence of adverse events or revision, survivorship analysis, and radiographic outcomes. Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this meta-analysis, and all RCTs had a follow-up period longer than 10 years. This meta-analysis shows no significant difference between the two groups with respect to the Keen Society Score (KSS; = 0.38), KSS function score ( = 0.30), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC; = 0.59), ROM ( = 0.71), radiolucent line ( = 0.45), femoral and tibial component positions in the coronal plane ( = 0.55 and 0.35, respectively), revision incidence ( = 0.77), and survivorship rates ( = 0.39). Meanwhile, it showed a slight difference between the two groups in the tibial component position in the sagittal plane ( = 0.003). According to this meta-analysis, the current best available evidence suggests no significant difference between the MB-TKA and FB-TKA groups with respect to the clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, revision, and survivorship at a minimum 10-year follow-up. This is a Level II, meta-analysis study.
这项荟萃分析旨在比较 10 年以上随访的活动平台全膝关节置换术（MB-TKA）与固定平台全膝关节置换术（FB-TKA）的临床和影像学结果。检索了 PubMed、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 数据库。根据 Cochrane 协作手册的潜在风险指南，由两名经过培训的评审员评估所有纳入的文章，并使用 CONSORT 清单和评分系统评估每个研究的方法学质量。提取的数据包括功能评分、膝关节活动度（ROM）、不良事件或翻修发生率、生存率分析和影像学结果。这项荟萃分析纳入了 7 项随机对照试验（RCT），所有 RCT 的随访时间均超过 10 年。这项荟萃分析表明，两组之间在 Keen 学会评分（KSS； = 0.38）、KSS 功能评分（ = 0.30）、西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数（WOMAC； = 0.59）、ROM（ = 0.71）、透亮线（ = 0.45）、冠状面股骨和胫骨组件位置（分别为 = 0.55 和 0.35）、翻修发生率（ = 0.77）和生存率（ = 0.39）方面无显著差异。同时，两组在矢状面胫骨组件位置上存在轻微差异（ = 0.003）。根据这项荟萃分析，目前最佳证据表明，在 10 年以上随访时，MB-TKA 与 FB-TKA 组在临床结果、影像学结果、翻修和生存率方面无显著差异。这是一项 II 级，荟萃分析研究。
