Introduction: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is considered to be a highly effective procedure and a definitive solution for severe degenerative knee arthritis. In recent decades, most total knee replacements have been performed with modular metal-backed polyethylene (MBT) tibial components. All-polyethylene (APT) tibial implants are a newer introduction and have proven equally effective compared to the MBT. In this study we try and compare the two over a period of two years.

Methodology: A prospective study was conducted to compare the clinical outcomes of APT and MBT in TKA. A total of 200 patients were enrolled in the study. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either an APT or an MBT. The primary outcome was the Knee Society Score (KSS) at 1 and 2 years after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the range of motion of the knee, the incidence of complications, and the need for revision surgery.

Results: The results of the study showed that there was no significant difference in the clinical outcomes of all-polyethylene tibial components (APT) and metal-backed tibial components (MBT) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at 1 or 2 years of follow-up. The mean Knee Society Score (KSS) was 90 in the APT group and 88 in the MBT group at 1 year, and 89 and 87, respectively, at 2 years. The range of motion (ROM) of the knee was also similar in the two groups at both 1 and 2 years. The incidence of complications was 2% in the APT group and 3% in the MBT group at 1 year, and 0% at 2 years in both the groups. There were no cases of revision surgery in either group at either time point. The p-values for all of the comparisons were >0.05, indicating that the differences between the two groups were not statistically significant.

Conclusion: The study found no significant difference in the clinical outcomes of APT and MBT in TKA. The decision of which type of implant to use should be made on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the patient's individual needs and preferences.