AbstractThis 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; p = 0.38), KSS function score (p = 0.30), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC; p = 0.59), ROM (p = 0.71), radiolucent line (p = 0.45), femoral and tibial component positions in the coronal plane (p = 0.55 and 0.35, respectively), revision incidence (p = 0.77), and survivorship rates (p = 0.39). Meanwhile, it showed a slight difference between the two groups in the tibial component position in the sagittal plane (p = 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.
Fixed-bearing vs mobile-bearing prostheses for total knee arthroplasty after approximately 10 years of follow-up: a meta-analysis
