Literature DB >> 23179453

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

Murat Bozkurt1, Ramazan Akmese, Nurdan Cay, Çetin Isik, Yenel Gurkan Bilgetekin, Merve Gulbiz Kartal, Osman Tecimel.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: There has been much emphasis on the importance of cam impingement, which is a cause of pain and knee hyperflexion restriction in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). This study aimed to correlate cam impingement in the posterior femoral condyle with an α-angle showing the severity of the impingement.
METHODS: The study groups consisted of 87 knees of 74 patients operated on with phase 3 medial Oxford UKA. Postoperatively, Group A (68 knees, 78.2 %) had no remnant of cam lesion; Group B (19 knees, 21.8 %) had cam lesion remnants. In Group C (18 knees, 20.7 %), which is a subgroup of Group A, cam lesions seen preoperatively were cleaned and not seen postoperatively.
RESULTS: The mean increase in active flexion was 20.4° (± 7.3°) in Group A, 9.7° (± 6.1°) in Group B and 20.8° (± 7.3°) in Group C. The difference between Group A and Group B and between Group B and Group C was statistically significant (p < 0.001, p < 0.001). The mean decrease of α-angle was 11.2° (± 4.1°) in Group B, and 31.1° (± 3.4°) in Group C. The difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Mean Oxford Knee Scores were 24 preoperatively, 41 postoperatively in Group A; 22 preoperatively, 38 postoperatively in Group B; and 24 preoperatively, 40 postoperatively in Group C. The differences were not significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Posterior condylar cam lesion is an impingement which limits hyperflexion and may be an early clinical finding prior to bearing dislocation and wear. The α-angle is a marker showing the severity of this cam lesion. This problem can be overcome using intraoperative fluoroscan views during cam excison and replacing the femoral component in 105° knee flexion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23179453     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-012-2301-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  28 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.  Knee joint kinematics in gait and other functional activities measured using flexible electrogoniometry: how much knee motion is sufficient for normal daily life?

Authors:  P J Rowe; C M Myles; C Walker; R Nutton
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.840

3.  [Medial unicompartmental knee replacement using the "Oxford Uni" meniscal bearing knee].

Authors:  P R Aldinger; M Clarius; D W Murray; J W Goodfellow; S J Breusch
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  New parameter of flexion after posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: posterior condylar offset ratio on X-ray photographs.

Authors:  Yoshinori Soda; Jiro Oishi; Tomoyuki Nakasa; Koichiro Nishikawa; Mitsuo Ochi
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2007-02-15       Impact factor: 3.067

5.  Cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement shows reduced radiolucency at one year.

Authors:  H Pandit; C Jenkins; D J Beard; J Gallagher; A J Price; C A F Dodd; J W Goodfellow; D W Murray
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2009-02

6.  Unicompartmental or total knee replacement? Five-year results of a prospective, randomised trial of 102 osteoarthritic knees with unicompartmental arthritis.

Authors:  J H Newman; C E Ackroyd; N A Shah
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1998-09

7.  What functional activities are important to patients with knee replacements?

Authors:  Jennifer M Weiss; Philip C Noble; Michael A Conditt; Harold W Kohl; Seth Roberts; Karon F Cook; Michael J Gordon; Kenneth B Mathis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Polyethylene wear in Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement: a retrieval study of 47 bearings.

Authors:  B J L Kendrick; D Longino; H Pandit; U Svard; H S Gill; C A F Dodd; D W Murray; A J Price
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2010-03

9.  Polyethylene wear of mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement at 20 years.

Authors:  B J L Kendrick; D J Simpson; B L Kaptein; E R Valstar; H S Gill; D W Murray; A J Price
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2011-04

10.  Oxford Phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: medium-term results of a minimally invasive surgical procedure.

Authors:  Lukas A Lisowski; Michel P J van den Bekerom; Peter Pilot; C Niek van Dijk; Andrzej E Lisowski
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-07-17       Impact factor: 4.342

View more
  2 in total

1.  Bearing dislocation of mobile bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in East Asian countries: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiaowei Sun; Pei Liu; Feifan Lu; Weiguo Wang; Wanshou Guo; Qidong Zhang
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 2.359

2.  A survival analysis of 1084 knees of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a comparison between consultant and trainee surgeons.

Authors:  N Bottomley; L D Jones; R Rout; A Alvand; I Rombach; T Evans; W F M Jackson; D J Beard; A J Price
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 5.082

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.