Literature DB >> 16239780

The John Insall Award: unicompartmental knee replacement: a minimum twenty-one-year followup, end-result study.

Michael R O'Rourke1, Jeremy J Gardner, John J Callaghan, Steve S Liu, Devon D Goetz, David A Vittetoe, Patrick M Sullivan, Richard C Johnston.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: We report the results of a minimum 21-year followup of a consecutive series of 103 patients who had 136 Marmor cemented unicompartmental knee replacements done between 1975 and 1982. Patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically. At minimum 21-year followup 14 patients (19 knees) were alive, 87 patients (115 knees) had died, and only two patients (two knees) were lost to followup. The average age at surgery was 70.9 years. The average followup Hospital for Special Surgery knee score was 58. The average Knee Society final followup clinical and functional scores averaged 72 and 53 points, respectively. Nineteen knees (14%) were revised during the 21-year followup period: nine for progression of disease, eight for loosening, and two for pain, at an average of 10.6 years (range, 1-22 years). Of the 19 knees in the 14 patients who were still alive at final followup, seven (37%) were revised: two for tibial loosening, four for disease progression, and one for pain. Unicompartmental knee replacements in this relatively older age group of patients performed well at minimum 21-year followup. Although we are encouraged by these results, only 22% were done in patients who were younger than 65 years at the time of surgery and the results in this group were significantly less durable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level IV-1 (case series). See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16239780     DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000185451.96987.aa

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  32 in total

1.  The impact of a high tibial valgus osteotomy and unicondylar medial arthroplasty on the treatment for knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Gunter Spahn; Gunther O Hofmann; Lars Victor von Engelhardt; Mengxia Li; Henning Neubauer; Hans Michael Klinger
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Management of osteoarthritis of the knee.

Authors:  Andrew Price; Robin Allum
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 3.  High tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for medial compartment arthrosis of the knee: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Federico Dettoni; Davide Edoardo Bonasia; Filippo Castoldi; Matteo Bruzzone; Davide Blonna; Roberto Rossi
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2010

4.  Bi-unicompartmental and combined uni plus patellofemoral replacement: indications and surgical technique.

Authors:  Sergio Romagnoli; Matteo Marullo; Michele Massaro; Enis Rustemi; Federico D'Amario; Michele Corbella
Journal:  Joints       Date:  2015-06-08

5.  Early failure of a mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement.

Authors:  Mateen H Arastu; J Vijayaraghavan; H Chissell; J B Hull; J H Newman; J R Robinson
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2009-03-31       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 6.  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

7.  Long-term survivorship and failure modes of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jared R H Foran; Nicholas M Brown; Craig J Della Valle; Richard A Berger; Jorge O Galante
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  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

9.  No long-term difference between fixed and mobile medial unicompartmental arthroplasty.

Authors:  Sebastien Parratte; Vanessa Pauly; Jean-Manuel Aubaniac; Jean-Noel A Argenson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Improved positioning of the tibial component in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with patient-specific cutting blocks.

Authors:  M L Dao Trong; C Diezi; G Goerres; N Helmy
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-01-17       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.