Medial Pivot Designs Versus Conventional Bearing Types in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and...

Medial pivot (MP) designs are growing in popularity. They provide increased sagittal plane stability and theoretically replicate some aspects of native joint kinematics, which may improve total knee arthroplasty outcomes.

A systematic review was performed of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared MP designs with cruciate-retaining, posterior-stabilized (PS), ultracongruent, or mobile-bearings in primary total knee arthroplasty, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The primary outcome measures were all clinical function scores, patient-reported outcome measures, and range of motion. The secondary outcome was complications. Two authors independently selected studies, performed data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment. Studies at high risk of bias were excluded from meta-analysis. Treatment effects were assessed using random-effects meta-analysis and quantified using pooled mean differences or incidence rate differences as appropriate.

Eight RCTs met inclusion criteria. Five compared MP with PS, two with ultracongruent, and one with cruciate-retaining and mobile-bearing. In total, 350 knees were randomized to MP and 375 to conventional bearings. One RCT was excluded from meta-analysis because of high risk of bias. Meta-analysis comparing MP with PS only was possible and found no differences at any time points for any outcome measure, including 2-year follow-up for Oxford Knee Score (MD = 0.35 favoring PS; 95% CI -0.49 to 1.20) and range of motion (MD = 1.58 favoring MP; 95% CI -0.76 to 11.92, P = 0.30) and 12 months for Western Ontario Arthritis Index (MD = 4.42 favoring MP; 95% CI -12.04 to 3.20, P = 0.09).

There is no difference in clinical outcomes, with contemporary measurement tools, at any time points, between MP and PS. There are insufficient RCTs comparing MP with other bearings.