Literature DB >> 12068405

Orthopaedic crossfire--can we justify unicondylar arthroplasty as a temporizing procedure? in the affirmative.

Gerard A Engh1.   

Abstract

In 1972, unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) was introduced, along with total knee arthroplasty (TKA), as an option for managing gonarthrosis. Although the early clinical results with the first generation of implants were equivalent to those of total knee arthroplasty, little interest in UKA was sustained. If unicondylar arthroplasty is to realize a role in the management of degenerative arthritis, even as a temporizing procedure, the results must be predictable and reproducible. Patient satisfaction must be equivalent to or better than that of TKA. Finally, the conversion of UKA to TKA must be uncomplicated, avoiding complex reconstructive procedures and the use of revision implants. As documented in the literature, UKA achieves these goals. Therefore, we cannot only justify UKA as a temporizing procedure, but also as a definitive procedure with long-term results that are comparable to TKA for gonarthrosis. Copyright 2002, Elsevier Science (USA).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12068405     DOI: 10.1054/arth.2002.32448

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  13 in total

Review 1.  Lateral uni-compartmental knee replacement: current concepts and future directions.

Authors:  E Servien; A Merini; S Lustig; P Neyret
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-07-06       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Long-term results with a lateral unicondylar replacement.

Authors:  Jean-Noël A Argenson; Sebastien Parratte; Antoine Bertani; Xavier Flecher; Jean-Manuel Aubaniac
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-06-24       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty through a lateral parapatellar approach has high early survivorship.

Authors:  Keith R Berend; Michael C Kolczun; Joseph W George; Adolph V Lombardi
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Preliminary remarks on a prospective multicenter study of the Repicci minimally invasive unicondylar knee replacement.

Authors:  Susanne Fuchs; Helmut Strosche; Werner Tinius; Heinz Gierse; Ullrich Gebhardt
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2005-05-05       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Knee arthroplasty for spontaneous osteonecrosis of the knee: unicompartimental vs bicompartimental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  S Radke; N Wollmerstedt; A Bischoff; J Eulert
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2004-09-24       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Outcome of revision of unicompartmental knee replacement.

Authors:  Jacqueline R Hang; Tyman E Stanford; Stephen E Graves; David C Davidson; Richard N de Steiger; Lisa N Miller
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.717

7.  Clinical and functional results after the rehabilitation period in minimally-invasive unicondylar knee arthroplasty patients.

Authors:  Susanne Fuchs; Bernd Rolauffs; Thorsten Plaumann; Carsten O Tibesku; Dieter Rosenbaum
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2004-06-02       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: a comparative study to the standard approach.

Authors:  Naji Dabboussi; Mazen Sakr; Julien Girard; Riad Fakih
Journal:  N Am J Med Sci       Date:  2012-02

9.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for tricompartment osteoarthritis in octogenarians.

Authors:  Sks Marya; Rajiv Thukral
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.251

10.  Outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in octogenarians with tricompartmental osteoarthritis: A longer followup of previously published report.

Authors:  Sanjiv Ks Marya; Rajiv Thukral
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 1.251

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.