Comparison of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasties: Short-term clinical results

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorKaymaz, Burak
dc.contributor.authorSevinçhan, Cihan
dc.contributor.authorGölge, Umut Hatay
dc.contributor.authorNusran, Gürdal
dc.contributor.authorGöksel, Ferdi
dc.contributor.authorKömürcü, Erkam
dc.contributor.authorEroğlu, Mehmet
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-27T19:43:32Z
dc.date.available2025-01-27T19:43:32Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.departmentÇanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractObjectives: Mobile-bearing knee replacements were introduced as an alternative to fixed-bearing prosthesis to decrease the wear. Despite theoretical advantages of mobile bearings prosthesis, it is still controversial whether there is any clinically significant difference between the patients treated with fixed and mobile bearing prosthesis. The aim of this study is to compare the short-term clinical outcomes of fixed versus mobile-bearing prosthesises. Methods: Patients who were diagnosed as grade 4 gonartrosis and operated for total knee arthroplasty between years 2010- 2014 were evaluated and 33 patients (40 knees) were included in the study. From hospital medical and radiological databases, age and gender of the patients, duration of operation, number of blood tranfusions postoperatively and preoperative range of motions (ROM) of the operated knees were recorded and all the patients were assessed with Knee Society Knee Score. Results: Twenty-two knees (12 female, 10 male) were present in fixed bearing group (Group I) and 18 knees (13 female, 5 male) were present in mobile bearing group (Group II). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of pre-operative range of motions (ROM), post-operative range of motions (ROM), number of blood transfusions. Knee Society Knee Score was 167.7±23.4 in Group I and 178.1±22.4 in Group II. Mobile bearing prosthesis group was found to have better knee score and this difference was near to statistically significance (p=0.055). Conclusions: Clinical outcomes of mobile bearing prosthesis seems to be better in short-term follow-up but long-term results should also be investigated before recommending the mobile bearing prosthesises.
dc.identifier.endpage62
dc.identifier.issn2148-2357
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.startpage58
dc.identifier.trdizinid192596
dc.identifier.urihttps://search.trdizin.gov.tr/tr/yayin/detay/192596
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12428/18015
dc.identifier.volume3
dc.indekslendigikaynakTR-Dizin
dc.language.isoen
dc.relation.ispartofActa Medica Anatolia
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Ulusal Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_TRD_20250125
dc.subjectCerrahi
dc.subjectOrtopedi
dc.titleComparison of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasties: Short-term clinical results
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

TR-Dizin İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu