BACKGROUND: TKA and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are both utilized to treat unicompartmental knee arthrosis. While some surgeons assume UKA provides better function than TKA, this assumption is based on greater final outcome scores rather than on change in scores and many patients with UKA have higher preoperative scores. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore asked whether TKA would demonstrate (1) better change in clinical outcome scores from preoperative to postoperative states and (2) better survivorship than UKA. METHODS: We evaluated 4087 patients with 5606 TKAs and 179 patients with 279 UKAs performed between 1978 and 2009. Patients with TKA were older and heavier than patients with UKA (mean age, 68 versus 66 years; mean BMI, 32 versus 29). We compared preoperative, latest postoperative, and change in Knee Society Clinical Rating System (KSCRS), SF-12, and WOMAC scores. Minimum followup was 2 years (UKA: mean, 7 years; range, 2.0-23 years; TKA: mean, 6.5 years; range, 2.0-33 years). Preoperative outcome measure scores (WOMAC, SF-12, KSCRS) were higher in the UKA group. RESULTS: Patients with UKA had higher postoperative KSCRS and SF-12 mental scores. Changes in score for all WOMAC domains were similar between groups. Total KSCRS changes in score were similar between groups, although patients with TKA had higher knee scores (49 versus 43) but lower function scores than UKA (21 versus 26). Cumulative revision rate was higher for UKA than for TKA (13% versus 7%). Kaplan-Meier survivorship at 5 and 10 years was 95% and 90%, respectively, for UKA and 98% and 95%, respectively, for TKA. CONCLUSIONS: While patients with UKA had higher pre- and postoperative scores than patients with TKA, the changes in scores were similar in both groups and survival appeared higher in patients with TKA.
BACKGROUND: TKA and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are both utilized to treat unicompartmental knee arthrosis. While some surgeons assume UKA provides better function than TKA, this assumption is based on greater final outcome scores rather than on change in scores and many patients with UKA have higher preoperative scores. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore asked whether TKA would demonstrate (1) better change in clinical outcome scores from preoperative to postoperative states and (2) better survivorship than UKA. METHODS: We evaluated 4087 patients with 5606 TKAs and 179 patients with 279 UKAs performed between 1978 and 2009. Patients with TKA were older and heavier than patients with UKA (mean age, 68 versus 66 years; mean BMI, 32 versus 29). We compared preoperative, latest postoperative, and change in Knee Society Clinical Rating System (KSCRS), SF-12, and WOMAC scores. Minimum followup was 2 years (UKA: mean, 7 years; range, 2.0-23 years; TKA: mean, 6.5 years; range, 2.0-33 years). Preoperative outcome measure scores (WOMAC, SF-12, KSCRS) were higher in the UKA group. RESULTS:Patients with UKA had higher postoperative KSCRS and SF-12 mental scores. Changes in score for all WOMAC domains were similar between groups. Total KSCRS changes in score were similar between groups, although patients with TKA had higher knee scores (49 versus 43) but lower function scores than UKA (21 versus 26). Cumulative revision rate was higher for UKA than for TKA (13% versus 7%). Kaplan-Meier survivorship at 5 and 10 years was 95% and 90%, respectively, for UKA and 98% and 95%, respectively, for TKA. CONCLUSIONS: While patients with UKA had higher pre- and postoperative scores than patients with TKA, the changes in scores were similar in both groups and survival appeared higher in patients with TKA.
Authors: Peter Vorlat; Guy Putzeys; Dominique Cottenie; Tom Van Isacker; Nicole Pouliart; Frank Handelberg; Pierre-Paul Casteleyn; Filip Gheysen; René Verdonk Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2005-05-14 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Steven J MacDonald; Kory D Charron; Robert B Bourne; Douglas D Naudie; Richard W McCalden; Cecil H Rorabeck Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Neil P Walton; Ismail Jahromi; Peter L Lewis; Peter J Dobson; Kevin R Angel; David G Campbell Journal: J Knee Surg Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 2.757
Authors: Timothy Kostamo; Robert B Bourne; John Paul Whittaker; Richard W McCalden; Steven J MacDonald Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2008-09-09 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Shaw Akizuki; John K P Mueller; Hiroshi Horiuchi; Daigo Matsunaga; Atsuyuki Shibakawa; Richard D Komistek Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2008-08-12 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Vaishnav Rajgopal; Robert B Bourne; Bert M Chesworth; Steven J MacDonald; Richard W McCalden; Cecil H Rorabeck Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Roland Becker; Christian Mauer; Christian Stärke; Mathias Brosz; Thore Zantop; Christoph H Lohmann; Martin Schulze Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2012-08-07 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Christian Schroeder; Thomas M Grupp; Bernhard Fritz; Christoph Schilling; Yan Chevalier; Sandra Utzschneider; Volkmar Jansson Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2013-02-17 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: Joseph F Konopka; Andreas H Gomoll; Thomas S Thornhill; Jeffrey N Katz; Elena Losina Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2015-05-20 Impact factor: 5.284