Literature DB >> 12502197

The effect of implant constraint on results of conversion of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty.

Michael Miller1, James B Benjamin, Blake Marson, Steve Hollstien.   

Abstract

A series of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) revision to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was compared to a group of primary TKAs performed at the same institution. The UKA revision group had a higher incidence of local wound complications and inferior clinical results as measured by Knee Society scores. When the revisions were stratified by the degree of interface constraint, knees revised with posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) substituting designs had superior knee scores that were comparable to the primary group. The use of a PCL-substituting knee design is recommended when converting a UKA to TKA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12502197     DOI: 10.3928/0147-7447-20021201-12

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopedics        ISSN: 0147-7447            Impact factor:   1.390


  8 in total

1.  The clinical outcome of revision knee replacement after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus primary total knee arthroplasty: 8-17 years follow-up study of 49 patients.

Authors:  Jaakko Järvenpää; Jukka Kettunen; Hannu Miettinen; Heikki Kröger
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2009-05-27       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Revision of 33 unicompartmental knee prostheses using total knee arthroplasty: strategy and results.

Authors:  Dominique Saragaglia; Gilles Estour; Charbel Nemer; Pierre-Emmanuel Colle
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-06-18       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Leg axis correction with ConforMIS iForma (interpositional device) in unicompartmental arthritis of the knee.

Authors:  Franz Xaver Koeck; Lars Perlick; Christian Luring; Martin Handel; Johannes Beckmann; Oliver Linhardt; Joachim Grifka
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-06-19       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Results of a French multicentre retrospective experience with four hundred and eighteen failed unicondylar knee arthroplasties.

Authors:  Dominique Saragaglia; Michel Bonnin; David Dejour; Gérard Deschamps; Christophe Chol; Benoit Chabert; Ramsay Refaie
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-05-29       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 5.  A meta-analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty revised to total knee arthroplasty versus primary total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Xuedong Sun; Zheng Su
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 2.359

6.  Comparison of the clinical outcomes of revision of failed UKAs to TKAs with primary TKAs: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Wei Zuo; Jinhui Ma; Wanshou Guo; Qidong Zhang; Weiguo Wang; Zhaohui Liu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 1.817

7.  Revision of unicondylar to total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Authors:  Nashat A Siddiqui; Zafar M Ahmad
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2012-07-27

8.  Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: implants used and causes of failure.

Authors:  Alan de Paula Mozella; Felipe Borges Gonçalves; Jansen Osterno Vasconcelos; Hugo Alexandre de Araújo Barros Cobra
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop       Date:  2014-03-31
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.