Meta-analyses showed no clinical ly relevant differences in terms of revision rates , clinical outcome scores or patient-reported outcome measures between MB and FB TKRs .
It appears that theoretical assumptions of superiority of MB over FB TKR are not borne out in clinical practice
Mobile-bearing ( MB ) total knee replacement ( TKR ) was introduced to reduce the risk of aseptic loosening and wear of polyethylene inserts .
However , no consistent clinical advantages of mobile- over fixed-bearing ( FB ) TKR have been found .
In this study we evaluated whether mobile bearings have an advantage over fixed bearings with regard to revision rates and clinical outcome scores .
Furthermore , we determined which modifying variables affected the outcome .
Comparison of micromotion in mobile bearing and posterior stabilized total knee prostheses
Background On theoretical grounds mobile bearing total knees should reduce the micromotion of the tibial component relative to the bone . Patients and methods We used radiostereometric analysis to measure the three-dimensional micromotion in  42 tibial components  during 2 years of follow-up . The patients had been r and omized as to whether they would receive a mobile bearing ( MB ) or posterior stabilized ( PS ) design .  We expected that the MB knee would facilitate dissipation of forces from the prosthesis-bone interface by the motion of the bearing and by load sharing with the soft tissues , leading to less micromotion . In the PS design s , limited free rotation caused by the campost articulation might cause additional stress at the bone-prosthesis interface . Results We found no significant differences between the MB and PS group at the 2-year follow-up evaluation with respect to Knee Society scores and radiographic results . The PS group had a higher variability in subsidence and anterior-posterior tilting of the component than the MB group . Interpretation The low variability of the data in the MB knee prosthesis group suggests that this design is more predictable and forgiving with respect to micromotion of the tibial component
Meta-analyses showed no clinical ly relevant differences in terms of revision rates , clinical outcome scores or patient-reported outcome measures between MB and FB TKRs .
It appears that theoretical assumptions of superiority of MB over FB TKR are not borne out in clinical practice
Mobile-bearing ( MB ) total knee replacement ( TKR ) was introduced to reduce the risk of aseptic loosening and wear of polyethylene inserts .
However , no consistent clinical advantages of mobile- over fixed-bearing ( FB ) TKR have been found .
In this study we evaluated whether mobile bearings have an advantage over fixed bearings with regard to revision rates and clinical outcome scores .
Furthermore , we determined which modifying variables affected the outcome .