Literature DB >> 21909464

Mid-term results of oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Won-Sik Choy1, Kap Jung Kim, Sang Ki Lee, Dae Suk Yang, Neung Ki Lee.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study examined the clinical and radiologic mid-term results of patients treated by Oxford minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
METHODS: One hundred and eighty-eight knees of unicompartmental knee arthroplasties with Oxford Uni® in 166 patients (16 males and 150 females), which were performed between 2002 and 2005, were reviewed. The mean age was 65.3 years (range, 44 to 82 years) and the mean follow-up period was 79.8 months (range, 56 to 103 months). The preoperative diagnosis was osteoarthritis in 166 patients, osteonecrosis of the medial femoral condyle in 20 and chondrocalcinosis in 2.
RESULTS: The mean Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee score was 67.5 (range, 52 to 75) preoperatively and 89.9 (range, 85 to 100) at the final follow-up. The mean preoperative flexion contracture was 6.5° (range, 0 to 15°) and 0.8° (range, 0 to 5°) at the final follow-up. The mean full flexion increased from 135° (range, 90 to 150°) preoperatively to 150° (range, 140 to 165°) at the final follow-up. Active full flexion was possible within 2 postoperative months. The squatting and cross-leg postures were possible in 133 patients (80.1%) and 152 patients (91.6%) at the final follow-up. The mean tibiofemoral angle was improved from varus 1.5° to valgus 4.8°. Complications were encountered in 18 cases (9.5%). A bearing dislocation occurred in 10 cases (5.3%), tibial component loosening in 4 cases (2.1%), femoral loosening in 3 cases (1.6%) and lateral translation in 1 case (0.5%). The mean time for a bearing dislocation was 22.6 months (range, 3 to 70 months) postoperatively. Seven cases returned to the predislocation level of activity with the insertion of a thicker bearing and 3 cases converted to total knee arthroplasty.
CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with Oxford Uni® provided rapid recovery, good pain relief and excellent function suitable for the Korean lifestyle. In contrast, the high complication rates of Oxford Uni® encountered in the mid-term results suggested less reliability than total knee arthroplasty.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Knee; Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21909464      PMCID: PMC3162197          DOI: 10.4055/cios.2011.3.3.178

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg        ISSN: 2005-291X


  30 in total

1.  Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A survival analysis of an independent series.

Authors:  U C Svärd; A J Price
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2001-03

2.  Analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in a community-based implant registry.

Authors:  Terence J Gioe; Kathleen K Killeen; Daniel P Hoeffel; Jack M Bert; Thomas K Comfort; Karen Scheltema; Susan Mehle; Katherine Grimm
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 3.  Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jean-Noël A Argenson; Xavier Flecher
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with Miller-Galante II prosthesis: mid-term clinical and radiographic results.

Authors:  Esa Koskinen; Pekka Paavolainen; Antti Eskelinen; Arsi Harilainen; Jerker Sandelin; Pekka Ylinen; Kaj Tallroth; Ville Remes
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2008-06-17       Impact factor: 3.067

5.  Unicondylar knee replacement.

Authors:  J Insall; P Walker
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1976-10       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee. A follow-up of 3 to 9 years.

Authors:  G S Inglis
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1984-11

7.  A five to seven-year follow-up of unicondylar arthroplasty.

Authors:  J Insall; P Aglietti
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1980-12       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Unicompartmental tibiofemoral resurfacing arthroplasty.

Authors:  R S Laskin
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  The mechanics of the knee and prosthesis design.

Authors:  J Goodfellow; J O'Connor
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1978-08

10.  Deformation and loosening of the tibial component in knee arthroplasty with unicompartmental endoprostheses.

Authors:  K Knutson; G Jónsson; J Langer Andersen; H Lárusdóttir; L Lidgren
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1981-12
View more
  15 in total

1.  The Oxford unicompartmental knee fails at a high rate in a high-volume knee practice.

Authors:  William C Schroer; C Lowry Barnes; Paul Diesfeld; Angela LeMarr; Rachel Ingrassia; Diane J Morton; Mary Reedy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-08-02       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  Causes of revision following Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Seung-Ju Kim; Ricardo Postigo; Sowon Koo; Jong Hun Kim
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-09-01       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis: an effective tool to predict implant survival after an all-poly unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-a 10 year follow-up study.

Authors:  Danilo Bruni; Laura Bragonzoni; Michele Gagliardi; Marco Bontempi; Ibrahim Akkawi; Giovanni Francesco Raspugli; Francesco Iacono; Silvio Patella; Maurilio Marcacci
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-06-11       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 4.  [Recommendations for unicondylar knee replacement in the course of time : A current inventory].

Authors:  J Beckmann; M T Hirschmann; G Matziolis; J Holz; R V Eisenhart-Rothe; C Becher
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 5.  Fixed- versus mobile-bearing UKA: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Geert Peersman; Bart Stuyts; Tom Vandenlangenbergh; Philippe Cartier; Peter Fennema
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Outcome after high tibial open-wedge osteotomy: a retrospective evaluation of 533 patients.

Authors:  Stephanie Floerkemeier; Alex E Staubli; Steffen Schroeter; Sabine Goldhahn; Philipp Lobenhoffer
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-06-29       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  A novel radiographic technique to assess 180° rotational spin of the Oxford unicompartmental knee mobile bearing.

Authors:  Salman Jamshed; Rohi Shah; Arrish Arooj; Adrian Turner; Christos Plakogiannis
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2020-08-26

8.  Minimum thickness of all-poly tibial component unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients younger than 60 years does not increase revision rate for aseptic loosening.

Authors:  Danilo Bruni; Ibrahim Akkawi; Francesco Iacono; Giovanni Francesco Raspugli; Michele Gagliardi; Marco Nitri; Alberto Grassi; Stefano Zaffagnini; Simone Bignozzi; Maurilio Marcacci
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-06-28       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Cam impingement of the posterior femoral condyle in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Murat Bozkurt; Ramazan Akmese; Nurdan Cay; Çetin Isik; Yenel Gurkan Bilgetekin; Merve Gulbiz Kartal; Osman Tecimel
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-11-23       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Patients' preoperative perspectives concerning the decision to undergo total knee arthroplasty and comparison of their clinical assessments.

Authors:  Yıldız Analay Akbaba; İpek Yeldan; Arzu Razak Özdinçler; Nejat Güney
Journal:  J Phys Ther Sci       Date:  2015-08-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.