Numerous studies have compared metal-backed components (MBTs) and all-polyethylene tibial components (APTs), but none of them specifically analysed the clinical results and the overall patient preference in patients who had undergone a staged bilateral knee replacement. The purpose of this study is to compare clinical results, perceived range of motion, and overall implant preference among patients who had undergone staged bilateral knee replacement with an APT and contralateral knee replacement with MBTs. A dataset of 62 patients from a single centre who underwent staged bilateral TKA between 2009 and 2022 was selected and retrospectively analysed. Tibial component removal was performed in three knees overall, all of which had MBTs. The mean measured Knee Score (KS) of knees with APTs was 78.37 and that of contralateral knees with MBTs was 77.4. The mean measured Function (FS) of knees with APTs was 78.22, and that of contralateral knees with MBs was 76.29. The mean flexion angle of knees with APTs was 103.8 and that for knees with MBTs was 101.04 degrees. A total of 54.8% of the patients preferred the knee that received APTs over contralateral MBTs. In our cohort, TKA with an APT in one knee and an MBT in the contralateral knee recorded similar clinical results and perceived ranges of motion. Patients in general preferred the knee that received an APT over contralateral knee with an MBT.

1st Department of Orthopaedic Surgery St Anne's University Hospital 602 00 Brno Czech Republic

Faculty of Medicine Masaryk University 625 00 Brno Czech Republic

Institute of Solid Mechanics Mechatronics and Biomechanics Faculty of Mechanical Engineering Brno University of Technology 601 90 Brno Czech Republic

See more in PubMed

Batailler C., Swan J., Sappey Marinier E., Servien E., Lustig S. New Technologies in Knee Arthroplasty: Current Concepts. J. Clin. Med. 2020;10:47. doi: 10.3390/jcm10010047. PubMed DOI PMC

Palazzuolo M., Antoniadis A., Mahlouly J., Wegrzyn J. Total Knee Arthroplasty Improves the Quality-Adjusted Life Years in Patients Who Exceeded Their Estimated Life Expectancy. Int. Orthop. 2021;45:635–641. doi: 10.1007/s00264-020-04917-y. PubMed DOI PMC

Apostolopoulos V., Nachtnebl L., Mahdal M., Pazourek L., Boháč P., Janíček P., Tomáš T. Clinical Outcomes and Survival Comparison between NexGen All-Poly and Its Metal-Backed Equivalent in Total Knee Arthroplasty. Int. Orthop. 2023;47:2207–2213. doi: 10.1007/s00264-023-05772-3. PubMed DOI PMC

Longo U.G., Ciuffreda M., D’Andrea V., Mannering N., Locher J., Denaro V. All-Polyethylene versus Metal-Backed Tibial Component in Total Knee Arthroplasty. Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc. 2017;25:3620–3636. doi: 10.1007/s00167-016-4168-0. PubMed DOI

Yassin M., Garti A., Weissbrot M., Ashkenazi U., Khatib M., Robinson D. All-Polyethylene Tibial Components Are Not Inferior to Metal-Backed Tibial Components in Long-Term Follow-up of Knee Arthroplasties. Eur. J. Orthop. Surg. Traumatol. 2015;25:1087–1091. doi: 10.1007/s00590-015-1645-y. PubMed DOI

Mohan V., Inacio M.C.S., Namba R.S., Sheth D., Paxton E.W. Monoblock All-Polyethylene Tibial Components Have a Lower Risk of Early Revision than Metal-Backed Modular Components: A Registry Study of 27,657 Primary Total Knee Arthroplasties. Acta Orthop. 2013;84:530–536. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2013.862459. PubMed DOI PMC

Voss B., El-Othmani M.M., Schnur A.-K., Botchway A., Mihalko W.M., Saleh K.J. A Meta-Analysis Comparing All-Polyethylene Tibial Component to Metal-Backed Tibial Component in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Assessing Survivorship and Functional Outcomes. J. Arthroplast. 2016;31:2628–2636. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.08.035. PubMed DOI

Ryan S.P., Steele J.R., Plate J.F., Attarian D.E., Seyler T.M., Bolognesi M.P., Wellman S.S. All-Polyethylene Tibia: An Opportunity for Value-Based Care in Bundled Reimbursement Initiatives. Orthopedics. 2021;44:e114–e118. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20201009-01. PubMed DOI

Kumar V., Hasan O., Umer M., Baloch N. Cemented All-Poly Tibia in Resource Constrained Country, Affordable and Cost-Effective Care. Is It Applicable at This Era? Review Article. Ann. Med. Surg. 2019;47:36–40. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2019.09.010. PubMed DOI PMC

Nachtnebl L., Tomáš T., Apostolopoulos V., Pazourek L., Mahdal M. Long-Term Results of Total Knee Replacement Using P.F.C. Sigma System with an All-Polyethylene Tibial Component. Acta Chir. Orthop. Traumatol. Cech. 2021;88:412–417. PubMed

Apostolopoulos V., Tomáš T., Boháč P., Marcián P., Mahdal M., Valoušek T., Janíček P., Nachtnebl L. Biomechanical Analysis of All-Polyethylene Total Knee Arthroplasty on Periprosthetic Tibia Using the Finite Element Method. Comput. Methods Prog. Biomed. 2022;220:106834. doi: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2022.106834. PubMed DOI

Insall J.N., Dorr L.D., Scott R.D., Scott W.N. Rationale of the Knee Society Clinical Rating System. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1989;248:13–14. PubMed

Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide. AOA 2020: Table KT2 10 Most Used Femoral Prostheses in Primary Total Knee Replacement. [(accessed on 30 December 2022)]. Available online: https://aoanjrr.sahmri.com/documents/10180/689619/Hip%2C+Knee+%26+Shoulder+Arthroplasty+New/6a07a3b8-8767-06cf-9069-d165dc9baca7.

Doran J., Yu S., Smith D., Iorio R. The Role of All-Polyethylene Tibial Components in Modern TKA. J. Knee Surg. 2015;28:382–389. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1551832. PubMed DOI

Gustke K.A., Gelbke M.K. All-Polyethylene Tibial Component Use for Elderly, Low-Demand Total Knee Arthroplasty Patients. J. Arthrop. 2017;32:2421–2426. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.02.077. PubMed DOI

Herschmiller T., Bradley K.E., Wellman S.S., Attarian D.E. Early to Midterm Clinical and Radiographic Survivorship of the All-Polyethylene Versus Modular Metal-Backed Tibia Component in Primary Total Knee Replacement. J. Surg. Orthop. Adv. 2019;28:108–114. PubMed

Selvan D.R., Santini A.J.A., Davidson J.S., Pope J.A. The Medium-Term Survival Analysis of an All-Polyethylene Tibia in a Single-Series Cohort of over 1000 Knees. J. Arthrop. 2020;35:2837–2842. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.05.017. PubMed DOI

Kelley B., Mullen K., De A., Sassoon A. Modular Metal-Backed Tibial Components Provide Minimal Mid-Term Survivorship Benefits Despite Increased Cost and Frequency of Use: A Retrospective Review of the American Joint Replacement Registry Database. J. Arthrop. 2022;37:1570–1574.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2022.01.031. PubMed DOI

Nouta K.A., Verra W.C., Pijls B.G., Schoones J.W., Nelissen R.G.H.H. All-Polyethylene Tibial Components Are Equal to Metal-Backed Components: Systematic Review and Meta-Regression. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2012;470:3549–3559. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2582-2. PubMed DOI PMC

Jabbal M., Clement N., Walmsley P.J. All-Polyethylene Tibia Components Have the Same Functional Outcomes and Survival, and Are More Cost-Effective than Metal-Backed Components in Patients 70 Years and Older Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty: Propensity Match Study with a Minimum Five-Year Follow-Up. Bone Jt. Open. 2022;3:969–976. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.312.BJO-2022-0063.R1. PubMed DOI PMC

Najfeld M., Kalteis T., Spiegler C., Ley C., Hube R. The Safety of Bilateral Simultaneous Hip and Knee Arthroplasty versus Staged Arthroplasty in a High-Volume Center Comparing Blood Loss, Peri- and Postoperative Complications, and Early Functional Outcome. J. Clin. Med. 2021;10:4507. doi: 10.3390/jcm10194507. PubMed DOI PMC

Cammisa E., Sassoli I., La Verde M., Fratini S., Rinaldi V.G., Lullini G., Vaccari V., Zaffagnini S., Marcheggiani Muccioli G.M. Bilateral Knee Arthroplasty in Patients Affected by Windswept Deformity: A Systematic Review. J. Clin. Med. 2022;11:6580. doi: 10.3390/jcm11216580. PubMed DOI PMC

Sugita T., Miyatake N., Aizawa T., Sasaki A., Kamimura M., Takahashi A. Quality of Life after Staged Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Minimum Five-Year Follow-up Study of Seventy-Eight Patients. Int. Orthop. 2019;43:2309–2314. doi: 10.1007/s00264-018-4196-0. PubMed DOI

Schroeder L., Dunaway A., Dunaway D. A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Implant Preference of Patients with Bilateral TKA: One Knee with a Patient-Specific and One Knee with an Off-the-Shelf Implant. JBJS Rev. 2022;10:e20.00182. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.RVW.20.00182. PubMed DOI