Literature DB >> 23996106

Causes of revision following Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Seung-Ju Kim1, Ricardo Postigo, Sowon Koo, Jong Hun Kim.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is relatively rare, but there is concern that the minimally invasive approach might result in more complications and a higher rate of revision. Current data regarding the revision of UKA using the Oxford phase 3 prosthesis are confined to a few reviews of single-institution experience. The purpose of this study was to provide an evidence-based summarisation of the revision of UKA with a pooled analysis of the reported cases.
METHODS: A systematic review of published studies that evaluated the causes that required further surgical intervention after UKA using the Oxford phase 3 prosthesis was performed. A structured literature review of multiple databases referenced articles from 1998 to 2012. The revision rates between Asian population and western population were compared.
RESULTS: A total of 2,683 patients (3,138 knees) from 17 published studies were assessed. The median age of the patients was 62.5 (range 32-93) years. The median follow-up period was 5.6 (range 0.1-11) years. Postoperative revision was necessary in 146 knees with a pooled percentage of 4.6 %. Bearing dislocation was found to be the single most important predisposing cause of revision, with a pooled percentage of 1.5 % (47/3,138 knees). The rate of bearing dislocation was significantly higher in Asian population than that in western population (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Mobile bearing UKA seems to be less appropriate for the Asian population as extreme knee flexion is required for cultural purposes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23996106     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-013-2644-3

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


  46 in total

1.  Fixed or mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacement? A comparative cohort study.

Authors:  R E Gleeson; R Evans; C E Ackroyd; J Webb; J H Newman
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  Minimally invasive Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A note of caution!

Authors:  K L Luscombe; J Lim; P W Jones; S H White
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-08-01       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Early complications after minimally invasive mobile-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Moo-Ho Song; Bu-Hwan Kim; Seong-Jun Ahn; Seong-Ho Yoo; Min-Soo Lee
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2009-09-02       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  Postoperative limb alignment and its determinants after minimally invasive Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Arun B Mullaji; Gautam M Shetty; Raj Kanna
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2011-04-16       Impact factor: 4.757

5.  Unicompartmental replacement with the Marmor Modular knee: operative procedure and results.

Authors:  T Koshino; T Morii; J Wada; S Takahashi
Journal:  Bull Hosp Jt Dis Orthop Inst       Date:  1991

6.  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

7.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients aged less than 65.

Authors:  Annette W-Dahl; Otto Robertsson; Lars Lidgren; Lisa Miller; David Davidson; Stephen Graves
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.717

8.  Oxford Phase 3 Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA): Clinical and radiological results of minimum follow-up of 2 years.

Authors:  Lukas Aleksander Lisowski; Paul Menno Verheijen; Andrzej Edward Lisowski
Journal:  Ortop Traumatol Rehabil       Date:  2004 Nov-Dec

9.  Obesity, young age, patellofemoral disease, and anterior knee pain: identifying the unicondylar arthroplasty patient in the United States.

Authors:  Keith R Berend; Adolph V Lombardi; Joanne B Adams
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 1.390

10.  Analysis of Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement using the minimally invasive technique in patients aged 60 and above: an independent prospective series.

Authors:  Nanne P Kort; Jos J A M van Raay; John Cheung; Casper Jolink; Robbie Deutman
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2007-08-08       Impact factor: 4.342

View more
  18 in total

Review 1.  Cementless fixation in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Authors:  S Campi; H G Pandit; C A F Dodd; D W Murray
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-07-19       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Unicompartmental knee replacement - Current perspectives.

Authors:  Stefano Campi; Saket Tibrewal; Rory Cuthbert; Sheo B Tibrewal
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2017-11-28

3.  Mid-Term Results of Oxford Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty in Young Asian Patients Less than 60 Years of Age: A Minimum 5-Year Follow-up.

Authors:  Yeong-Joon Kim; Bu-Hwan Kim; Seong-Ho Yoo; Suk-Woong Kang; Chang-Hun Kwack; Moo-Ho Song
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2017-06-01

Review 4.  Long-term outcomes of over 8,000 medial Oxford Phase 3 Unicompartmental Knees-a systematic review.

Authors:  Hasan R Mohammad; Louise Strickland; Thomas W Hamilton; David W Murray
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2017-08-23       Impact factor: 3.717

5.  Patient outcomes in Anteromedial osteoarthritis patients over 80 years old undergoing Oxford Unicompartmental knee Arthroplasty in China.

Authors:  Jingbo Cheng; Mingli Feng; Guanglei Cao; Zheng Li; Shuai An; Shibao Lu
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 2.362

6.  Metal backed fixed-bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasties using minimal invasive surgery: a promising outcome analysis of 132 cases.

Authors:  Joel Baur; Lukas Zwicky; Michael Tobias Hirschmann; Thomas Ilchmann; Martin Clauss
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Analysis and Treatment of Complications after Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Kyung Tae Kim; Song Lee; Jae Il Lee; Jin Woo Kim
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2016-02-29

8.  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

Review 9.  Meta-Review of the Quantity and Quality of Evidence for Knee Arthroplasty Devices.

Authors:  Anna R Gagliardi; Ariel Ducey; Pascale Lehoux; Sue Ross; Patricia Trbovich; Anthony Easty; Chaim Bell; Julie Takata; Christof Pabinger; David R Urbach
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-10-03       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Modes of Failure and Conversion to Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Michele Vasso; Katia Corona; Rocco D'Apolito; Giuseppe Mazzitelli; Alfredo Schiavone Panni
Journal:  Joints       Date:  2017-06-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.