header advert
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 87-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1493 - 1497
1 Nov 2005
Price AJ Short A Kellett C Beard D Gill H Pandit H Dodd CAF Murray DW

Polyethylene particulate wear debris continues to be implicated in the aetiology of aseptic loosening following knee arthroplasty. The Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty employs a spherical femoral component and a fully congruous meniscal bearing to increase contact area and theoretically reduce the potential for polyethylene wear. This study measures the in vivo ten-year linear wear of the device, using a roentgenstereophotogrammetric technique.

In this in vivo study, seven medial Oxford unicompartmental prostheses, which had been implanted ten years previously were studied. Stereo pairs of radiographs were acquired for each patient and the films were analysed using a roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis calibration and a computer-aided design model silhouette-fitting technique. Penetration of the femoral component into the original volume of the bearing was our estimate of linear wear. In addition, eight control patients were examined less than three weeks post-insertion of an Oxford prosthesis, where no wear would be expected. The control group showed no measured wear and suggested a system accuracy of 0.1 mm. At ten years, the mean linear wear rate was 0.02 mm/year.

The results from this in vivo study confirm that the device has low ten-year linear wear in clinical practice. This may offer the device a survival advantage in the long term.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 85-B, Issue 1 | Pages 62 - 67
1 Jan 2003
Price AJ Rees JL Beard D Juszczak E Carter S White S de Steiger R Dodd CAF Gibbons M McLardy-Smith P Goodfellow JW Murray DW

Before proceeding to longer-term studies, we have studied the early clinical results of a new mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis in comparison with an established fixed-bearing device. Patients requiring bilateral knee replacement consented to have their operations under one anaesthetic using one of each prosthesis. They also agreed to accept the random choice of knee (right or left) and to remain ignorant as to which side had which implant. Outcomes were measured using the American Knee Society Score (AKSS), the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and determination of the range of movement and pain scores before and at one year after operation.

Preoperatively, there was no systematic difference between the right and left knees. One patient died in the perioperative period and one mobile-bearing prosthesis required early revision for dislocation of the meniscal component.

At one year the mean AKSS, OKS and pain scores for the new device were slightly better (p < 0.025) than those for the fixed-bearing device. There was no difference in the range of movement.

We believe that this is the first controlled, blinded trial to compare early function of a new knee prosthesis with that of a standard implant. It demonstrates a small but significant clinical advantage for the mobile-bearing design.