Skip to main content
. 2020 May 6;12(2):178–186. doi: 10.4055/cios19141

Table 3. Review of Available Literature Comparing Outcomes of Medial Pivot vs. Other Designs.

Study type Study Follow-up (yr) MP TKA/other design Outcome assessed (MP vs. other design)
ROM PROM Performance General health
Retrospective
 Matched pair Bae et al. (2016)13) 5 150/150 (PS) Better in PS No difference (KSS & WOMAC) Better in MP (Kujala & Feller) -
 Matched pair Nakamura (2018)25) 2 45/45 (CR) Better in MP Better in MP (KSS) - -
 Case series Samy (2018)22) 1 76/88 (PS) ND Better in MP (FJS) - -
 Case series Shakespeare (2006)24) 1 261/288 (PS) ND - - -
 Case series Choi et al. (2017)23) 5 49/52 (UC/RP) ND No difference (KSS & WOMAC) - -
Prospective
 RCT Hossain et al. (2011)5) 2 40/40 (PS) Better in MP Better in MP (WOMAC/Pain) Better in MP (TKFQ) Better physical in MP (SF-36)
 RCT Kim et al. (2009)18) 2 92/92 (PS mobile) Better in PS Better in PS (KSS) Better in PS (HSS) -
 RCT Kim et al. (2017)19) 11 182/182 (UC/RP) Better in UC Better in PS (KSS & WOMAC) - -
 RCT Benjamin (2018)20) 2 45/45 (PS-single radius) - ND (KSS) - -
 Cohort study Papagiannis (2016)21) 24/22 (UC/RP) ND ND (KSCS) ND (KFS) -
 RCT This study (2018) 2 37/36 (PS) Better in PS ND FJS/better objective KSS in PS Better in MP (SPW & TUG) ND (EQ-5D)

MP: medial pivot, TKA: total knee arthroplasty, ROM: range of motion, PROM: patient-reported outcome measures, PS: posterior-stabilized, KSS: Knee Society Score, WOMAC: Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index, CR: cruciate-retaining, ND: no difference, FJS: Forgotten Joint Score, UC/RP: ultracongruent/rotating platform insert, RCT: randomized controlled trial, TKFQ: total knee function questionnaire, SF-36: 36-item short form health survey, HSS: Hospital for Special Surgery Score, KSCS: Knee Society Clinical Score, KFS: Knee Function Score, SPW & TUG: self-paced walk and timed up and go, EQ-5D: European Quality of Life Index five dimensional on visual analog scale.