Long-Term Followup of Cementless Versus Hybrid Fixation for Total Knee Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a prospective trial, 99 patients (100 knees) with osteoarthritis were randomized to either cementless or hybrid fixation of cruciate-retaining Miller-Galante-I total knee arthroplasties between January 1987 and December 1988. Thirty-one patients died during the study period and two additional patients were lost to followup, leaving 67 total knee arthroplasties for analysis. Thirty-nine patients underwent revision surgery at an average of 6.9 years postoperatively. The main reason for revision surgery was failure of metal-backed patellas with 25 knees revised at an average of 7.4 years, and the second most common reason was tibial polyethylene failure. Survival curves showed 60% survival at 14 years for all knees, and 85% survival at 14 years when failures for metal-backed patellas and infection were excluded, with no significant difference between the two groups. Failure of metal-backed patellas was significantly higher in the cementless group. Tibial polyethylene failure occurred in five of the hybrid group and none of the cementless group, but this was not a significant difference. Surviving prostheses were assessed at an average of 12.8 years (range, 11.5-13.5 years). Average clinical scores were 94.8 points preoperatively, and 143 points at the latest followup, with significantly higher scores in the hybrid group. Differences in outcome between the two groups were not sufficiently significant to recommend one method of fixation over another. With elimination of poor design features related to the patellofemoral articulation and thin tibial polyethylene, cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasties can yield good durable results, whether cementless or hybrid fixation is used.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".