Literature DB >> 2019043

Rehabilitation after high tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental arthroplasty. A comparative study.

I Ivarsson1, J Gillquist.   

Abstract

Ten patients with medial gonarthrosis treated by unicompartmental arthroplasty were matched with ten patients who had high tibial osteotomy; their courses of rehabilitation were evaluated. All patients regained motion without problems, with no difference between the groups. Muscle torque was measured by a Cybex II dynamometer. The results six months postoperatively were better in the patients treated by unicompartmental arthroplasty than they were 12 months postoperatively in the patients treated by high tibial osteotomy. In the prosthesis group there was an increase in the maximal gait velocity and the duration of single support. In the osteotomy group there was no significant change. This difference in the results of rehabilitation constitutes an argument for arthroplasty in aged patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 2019043

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


  20 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Clinical and functional comparison of uni- and bicondylar sledge prostheses.

Authors:  S Fuchs; C O Tibesku; D Frisse; M Genkinger; H Laass; D Rosenbaum
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2004-12-24       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee replacement: retrospective clinical and radiographic evaluation of 83 patients.

Authors:  Danilo Bruni; Francesco Iacono; Alessandro Russo; Stefano Zaffagnini; Giulio Maria Marcheggiani Muccioli; Simone Bignozzi; Laura Bragonzoni; Maurilio Marcacci
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2009-09-18       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is superior to high tibial osteotomy in post-operative recovery and participation in recreational and sports activities.

Authors:  Man Soo Kim; In Jun Koh; Sueen Sohn; Ji Hwan Jeong; Yong In
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-12-18       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  The Oxford phase III unicompartmental knee replacement in patients less than 60 years of age.

Authors:  Nanne P Kort; Jos J A M van Raay; Jim J van Horn
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-10-07       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  The influence of walking speed on gait parameters in healthy people and in patients with osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Zoltán Bejek; Róbert Paróczai; Arpád Illyés; Rita M Kiss
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2005-12-06       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Closing-wedge high tibial osteotomy: survival and risk factor analysis at long-term follow up.

Authors:  Turgay Efe; Gafar Ahmed; Thomas J Heyse; Ulrich Boudriot; Nina Timmesfeld; Susanne Fuchs-Winkelmann; Bernd Ishaque; Stefan Lakemeier; Markus D Schofer
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2011-02-14       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  A mid term comparison of open wedge high tibial osteotomy vs unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee.

Authors:  Ryohei Takeuchi; Yusuke Umemoto; Masato Aratake; Haruhiko Bito; Izumi Saito; Ken Kumagai; Yohei Sasaki; Yasushi Akamatsu; Hiroyuki Ishikawa; Tomihisa Koshino; Tomoyuki Saito
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2010-08-30       Impact factor: 2.359

9.  Drop foot after high tibial osteotomy: a prospective study of aetiological factors.

Authors:  T Bauer; P Hardy; J Lemoine; D F Finlayson; S Tranier; A Lortat-Jacob
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2004-04-22       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  The young osteoarthritic knee: dilemmas in management.

Authors:  Paul M Sutton; Edward S Holloway
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 8.775

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.