After stratification on follow-up time and age , the revision rates were not substantially different , aside for younger patients in short term from studies with short-term follow-up .
Conclusion No essential differences between the two design s were observed .
MB and FB UKA design s have comparable revision rates .
Purpose Two design concepts are currently used for unicondylar knee arthroplasty ( UKA ) prostheses :  fixed bearing ( FB ) and mobile bearing ( MB ) .
While MB prostheses have theoretical advantages over their FB counterparts , it is not clear whether they are associated with better outcomes .
Unnecessary contraindications for mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement.
The contraindications for unicompartmental knee replacement  (  UKR ) remain controversial . The views of many surgeons are based on Kozinn and Scott 's 1989 publication which stated that patients who weighed more than 82 kg , were younger than 60 years , undertook heavy labour , had exposed bone in the patellofemoral joint or chondrocalcinosis , were not ideal c and i date s for UKR . Our aim was to determine whether these potential contraindications should apply to patients with a mobile-bearing UKR . In order to do this the outcome of patients with these potential contraindications was compared with that of patients without the contraindications in a prospect i ve series of 1000 UKRs . The outcome was assessed using the Oxford knee score , the American Knee Society score , the Tegner activity score , revision rate and survival . The clinical outcome of patients with each of the potential contraindications was similar to or better than those without each contraindication . Overall , 678 UKRs ( 68 % ) were performed in patients who had at least one potential contraindication and only 322 ( 32 % ) in patients deemed to be ideal . The survival at ten years was 97.0 % ( 95 % confidence interval 93.4 to 100.0 ) for those with potential contraindications and 93.6 % ( 95 % confidence interval 87.2 to 100.0 ) in the ideal patients . We conclude that the thresholds proposed by Kozinn and Scott using weight , age , activity , the state of the patellofemoral joint and chondrocalcinosis should not be considered to be contraindications for the use of the Oxford UKR
After stratification on follow-up time and age , the revision rates were not substantially different , aside for younger patients in short term from studies with short-term follow-up .
Conclusion No essential differences between the two design s were observed .
MB and FB UKA design s have comparable revision rates .
Purpose Two design concepts are currently used for unicondylar knee arthroplasty ( UKA ) prostheses :  fixed bearing ( FB ) and mobile bearing ( MB ) .
While MB prostheses have theoretical advantages over their FB counterparts , it is not clear whether they are associated with better outcomes .