IJHSR

International Journal of Health Sciences and Research

| Home | Current Issue | Archive | Instructions to Authors |

Meta Analysis

Year: 2022 | Month: July | Volume: 12 | Issue: 7 | Pages: 132-137

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52403/ijhsr.20220720

Comparison of Fixed-Bearing with Mobile-Bearing Prostheses for Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cokorda Gde Oka Dharmayuda1, I Made Yudi Mahardika2

1Consultant of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Department, Faculty of Medicine Udayana University, Sanglah General Hospital
2Resident of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Department, Faculty of Medicine Udayana University, Sanglah General Hospital

Corresponding Author: Cokorda Gde Oka Dharmayuda

ABSTRACT

Background: The rising prevalence of severe knee joint arthritis forces the orthopedic surgeon to do joint replacement as an effective end stage joint arthritis management. Currently, there are two types of bearing plans for TKA alone, namely fixed bearing and mobile bearing. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compares several outcomes between those two types of bearing plans such as ROM, KSS Clinical, KSS Functional, and WOMAC Score.
Methods: A literature search was carried out using PRISMA Guidelines in Pubmed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library using the terms “fixed bearing”, “mobile bearing”, “total knee arthroplasty”, and “outcome measure”. We extracted the data from each study and all of statistical analysis were performed using the Review Manager version 5.3 software.
Results: After an initial search and screening of 217 studies, 4 studies were included in our study. There was a significant difference statistically between those two groups in KSS functional score (Heterogeneity, I2 = 91 percent; WMD, 9.11; 95 percent Confidence Interval (CI), 6.51 to 11.70; P < 0.00001) There was no significant difference statistically between those two groups in ROM outcome (Heterogeneity, I2 = 93 percent; WMD, -0.11; 95 percent Confidence Interval (CI), -2.91 to 2.70; P = 0.94), KSS clinical score (Heterogeneity, I2 = 99 percent; WMD, 1.84; 95 percent Confidence Interval (CI), -2.32 to 6.01; P = 0.38), and WOMAC score (Heterogeneity, I2 = 100 percent; WMD, -0.90; 95 percent Confidence Interval (CI), -6.19 to 4.39; P = 0.74).
Conclusion: In terms of KSS Functional Score, our research found that the mobile-bearing design surpasses the fixed-bearing design. There may be no noticeable difference in ROM, KSS Clinical Score, or WOMAC Score between these two designs.

Key words: Fixed-bearing, Mobile-bearing, Total knee arthroplasty, Systematic review, Meta-analysis.

[PDF Full Text]