Conclusion Based on the small number of studies with appropriate statistical analysis , we are unable to reach a clear conclusion in the clinical performance of medial stabilized knee replacement construct .
Background Medial stabilized  total knee joint replacement ( TKJR ) construct is design ed to closely replicate the kinematics of the knee .
Little is known regarding comparison of clinical functional outcomes of patients utilising vali date d patient reported outcome measures ( PROM ) after medial stabilized TKJR and other construct design s. Purpose To perform a systematic review of the available literature related to the assessment of clinical functional outcomes following a  TKJR  employing a medial stabilized construct design .
Long-term comparison of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing total knee replacements in patients younger than fifty-one years of age with osteoarthritis.
BACKGROUND There is limited information comparing the results of fixed-bearing total knee replacement and mobile-bearing total knee replacement in patients with osteoarthritis who are younger than fifty-one years and who have a fixed-bearing implant in one knee and a mobile-bearing implant  in the other . The purpose of this study was to compare our long-term clinical and radiographic results of fixed-bearing total knee replacement and mobile-bearing total knee replacement in a group of patients from this population . METHODS We prospect ively compared the results of 108 patients with osteoarthritis who were younger than fifty-one years ( mean age , forty-five years ) who had received a fixed-bearing prosthesis in one knee and a rotating platform mobile-bearing prosthesis in the other .  The mean follow-up was 16.8 years ( range , fifteen to eighteen years ) . The patients were assessed clinical ly and radiographically . Knee motion and function were assessed as a primary outcome . Patients were assessed with question naires , and each knee was assessed separately . RESULTS Although there was significant improvement in both groups of knees , there was no significant difference between the groups ( i.e. , fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing knees ) with regard to the mean postoperative knee motion ( 126 ° and 128 ° , respectively ; p = 0.79 ) , the mean Knee Society knee clinical score ( 95 and 94 points , respectively ; p = 0.79 ) , or the Knee Society knee functional score ( 84 and 85 points , respectively ; p = 0.19 ) at the latest follow-up . In the fixed-bearing group , one knee was revised because of infection , two for aseptic loosening of the tibial component , and two because of wear of the tibial polyethylene insert . In the rotating platform mobile-bearing group , two knees were revised because of instability and one because of infection . The Kaplan-Meier survivorship for revision at 16.8 years of follow-up was 95 % ( 95 % confidence interval , 91 to 100 ) for the fixed-bearing prosthesis and 97 % ( 95 % confidence interval , 93 to 100 ) for the rotating platform mobile-bearing prosthesis . CONCLUSIONS Long-term results of both fixed and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasties were encouraging in patients who were younger than fifty-one years of age with osteoarthritis . However , we found no superiority of the mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis over the fixed-bearing total knee prosthesis
Conclusion Based on the small number of studies with appropriate statistical analysis , we are unable to reach a clear conclusion in the clinical performance of medial stabilized knee replacement construct .
Background Medial stabilized  total knee joint replacement ( TKJR ) construct is design ed to closely replicate the kinematics of the knee .
Little is known regarding comparison of clinical functional outcomes of patients utilising vali date d patient reported outcome measures ( PROM ) after medial stabilized TKJR and other construct design s. Purpose To perform a systematic review of the available literature related to the assessment of clinical functional outcomes following a  TKJR  employing a medial stabilized construct design .