RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the literature, there is no evidence suggesting the superiority in clinical performance between all-polyethylene (AP) and metal-backed (MB) tibial implants in total knee arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature to collect only high-quality studies investigating the differences in terms of clinical and radiostereometric analysis (RSA) outcomes of AP compared to MB implants. METHODS: Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting either clinical or RSA outcomes have been included. Data sources were Embase, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. RESULTS: We included eleven RCTs evaluating the outcomes of 1,377 patients. Of the RCTs, 9 of them showed a low risk and 2 showed moderate risk of bias. There was no statistically significant difference in terms of clinical outcomes and survival rate between the AP and MB group; however, a statistically significant lower mean lift-off in the AP group (0.19 mm) compared to the MB group (0.3 mm) was observed on RSA. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of AP total knee arthroplasty in terms of clinical outcomes and 5-year survival was not statistically different when compared to the MB group. However, the RSA showed a statistically significant lower mean lift-off in the AP group.
