الفهرس 
Mobile-bearing versus fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty
ContentsOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 187 |  |  |
| | | from | 187 | | |
Abstract
We were able to identify three studies only that compared a similar design from the same manufacturer of MB and FB variants. Price et al.(11) compared results of AGC FB (Biomet Merck, Bridgend, United Kingdom) and TMK MB (Biomet, Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) total knee prostheses in 39 patients who had bilateral simultaneous TKAs. At one year postoperatively, they demonstrated a very small yet statistically significant clinical advantage for the MB design in terms of KSS (p<0.025). Wholrab et al. compared the NexGen LPS MB and FB prosthesis (Zimmer) and demonstrated no significant difference between the functional outcomes of the two designs (84). Young-Hoo Kim et al. (54) conducted a RCT on 92 patients who had bilateral simultaneous TKAs using medial pivot prosthesis. They reported smaller ROM, less patient satisfaction, and a higher complication rate for the FB than for the MB prosthesis at a m ean follow up of 2.6 years