A randomized prospective study comparing mobile-bearing against fixed-bearing PFC Sigma cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasties with ten-year minimum follow-up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: This study compares the PFC total knee arthroplasty (TKA) system in a prospective randomized control trial (RCT) of the mobile-bearing rotating-platform (RP) TKA against the fixed-bearing (FB) TKA. This is the largest RCT with the longest follow-up where cruciate-retaining PFC total knee arthroplasties are compared in a non-bilateral TKA study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: (20 to 52) and 73 patients were female. The Knee Society Score (KSS), Knee Society Functional Score (KSFS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey Physical and Mental Component Scores (SF-12 PCS, SF-12 MCS) were gathered and recorded preoperatively, at five-years' follow-up, and at ten years' follow-up. Additionally, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) were collected at five- and ten-year follow-ups. The prevalence of radiolucent lines (RL) on radiographs and implant survival were recorded at five- and ten-year follow-ups. RESULTS: At the ten-year follow-up, the RP group (n = 39) had a statistically significant superior score in the OKS (p = 0.001), WOMAC (p = 0.023), SF-12 PCS (p = 0.019), KOOS Activities of Daily Living (ADL) (p = 0.010), and KOOS Sport and Recreation (Sport/Rec) (p = 0.006) compared with the FB group (n = 46). The OKS, SF-12 PCS, and KOOS Sport/Rec at ten years had mean scores above the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) threshold. There was no significant difference in prevalence of radiolucency between groups at five-years' follow-up (p = 0.449), nor at ten-years' follow-up (p = 0.08). Implant survival rate at 14 years postoperative was 95.2 (95% CI 90.7 to 99.8) and 94.7 (95% CI 86.8 to 100.0) for the RP and FB TKAs, respectively. CONCLUSION: At ten-year follow-up, the mobile-bearing knee joint arthroplasty had statistically and clinically relevant superior OKS, SF-12 PCS, and KOOS (Sport/Rec) than the fixed-bearing platform. No difference was seen in prevalence of radiolucent lines. There was a greater than 94% implant survival rate for both cohorts at 14 years. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1336-44.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".