Literature DB >> 25264410

Rehabilitation outcomes following revision for failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Wei Sheng Foong1, Ngai Nung Lo1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To investigate the post-operative outcomes of a revised UKA to a TKA compared to a primary TKA.
METHODS: 33 revised UKA were matched to primary TKA and assessed using SF-36, Oxford Knee Scores (OKS) and Knee Society Scores (KSS).
RESULTS: Both cohorts attained statistically similar SF-36 scores (p > 0.05). KSS improved by 51.12 in rev-UKA and 50.25 in primary TKA (p = 0.977) at 2 years. OKS scores were similar at 6 months (p = 0.094) and 2 years (p = 0.235)..
INTERPRETATION: Revision of UKA does not require a longer period of rehabilitation to achieve satisfactory return to function.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arthroplasty; Revision; Unicompartmental

Year:  2014        PMID: 25264410      PMCID: PMC4174263          DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2014.06.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop        ISSN: 0972-978X


  17 in total

1.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasties revised to total knee arthroplasties compared with primary total knee arthroplasties.

Authors:  Marie-France Rancourt; Kyle A R Kemp; Sarah M R Plamondon; Paul R Kim; Geoffrey F Dervin
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2012-04-13       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  Survival and functional outcome after revision of a unicompartmental to a total knee replacement: the New Zealand National Joint Registry.

Authors:  A J Pearse; G J Hooper; A Rothwell; C Frampton
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2010-04

Review 3.  Unicondylar knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  S C Kozinn; R Scott
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Yearly incidence of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the United States.

Authors:  Daniel L Riddle; William A Jiranek; Fred J McGlynn
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2007-11-26       Impact factor: 4.757

5.  Long-term survivorship and failure modes of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jared R H Foran; Nicholas M Brown; Craig J Della Valle; Richard A Berger; Jorge O Galante
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  The survivorship and results of total knee replacements converted from unicompartmental knee replacements.

Authors:  Simon Johnson; Peter Jones; John H Newman
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2007-02-01       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Revision of failed unicompartmental knee replacement to total knee replacement.

Authors:  Daud T S Chou; Girish N Swamy; James R Lewis; Nitin P Badhe
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Revision of minimal resection resurfacing unicondylar knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty: results compared with primary total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Turlough M P O'Donnell; Omar Abouazza; Michael J Neil
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 4.757

9.  The Repicci II® unicondylar knee arthroplasty: 9-year survivorship and function.

Authors:  Turlough O'Donnell; Michael J Neil
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-08-13       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Conversion of failed modern unicompartmental arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  W N Levine; R M Ozuna; R D Scott; T S Thornhill
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 4.757

View more
  1 in total

1.  Computer navigation for revision of unicompartmental knee replacements to total knee replacements: the results of a case-control study of forty six knees comparing computer navigated and conventional surgery.

Authors:  Dominique Saragaglia; Jérémy Cognault; Ramsay Refaie; Brice Rubens-Duval; Roch Mader; René Christopher Rouchy; Stephane Plaweski; Régis Pailhé
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 3.075

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.