Literature DB >> 27114932

Promising short-term clinical results of the cementless Oxford phase III medial unicondylar knee prosthesis.

Karin B van Dorp1, Stefan Jm Breugem1, Daniël J Bruijn1, Marcel Jm Driessen1.   

Abstract

AIM: To investigate the short-term clinical results of the Oxford phase III cementless medial unicondylar knee prosthesis (UKP) compared to the cemented medial UKP.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in a tertairy orthopedic centre between the period of May 2010 and September 2012. We included 99 medial UKP in 97 patients and of these UKP, 53 were cemented and 46 were cementless. Clinical outcome was measured using a questionnaire, containing a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, Oxford Knee score, Kujala score and SF-12 score. Knee function was tested using the American Knee Society score. Complications, reoperations and revisions were recorded. Statistical significance was defined as a P value < 0.05.
RESULTS: In a mean follow-up time of 19.5 mo, three cemented medial UKP were revised to a total knee prosthesis. Reasons for revision were malrotation of the tibial component, aseptic loosening of the tibial component and progression of osteoarthritis in the lateral- and patellofemoral compartment. In five patients a successful reoperation was performed, because of impingement or (sub)luxation of the polyethylene bearing. Patients with a reoperation were significant younger than patients in the primary group (56.7 vs 64.0, P = 0.01) and were more likely to be male (85.7% vs 38.8%, P = 0.015). Overall the cementless medial UKP seems to perform better, but the differences in clinical outcome are not significant; a VAS pain score of 7.4 vs 11.7 (P = 0.22), an Oxford Knee score of 43.3 vs 41.7 (P = 0.27) and a Kujala score of 79.6 vs 78.0 (P = 0.63). The American Knee Society scores were slightly better in the cementless group with 94.5 vs 90.2 (P = 0.055) for the objective score and 91.2 vs 87.8 (P = 0.25) for the subjective score.
CONCLUSION: The cementless Oxford phase III medial UKP shows good short-term clinical results, when used in a specialist clinic by an experienced surgeon.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cementless; Knee osteoarthritis; Reoperation; Treatment outcome; Unicondylar knee arthroplasty

Year:  2016        PMID: 27114932      PMCID: PMC4832226          DOI: 10.5312/wjo.v7.i4.251

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Orthop        ISSN: 2218-5836


  17 in total

1.  The routine of surgical management reduces failure after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  O Robertsson; K Knutson; S Lewold; L Lidgren
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2001-01

2.  Translation and validation of the Dutch version of the Oxford 12-item knee questionnaire for knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Daniël Haverkamp; Stefan J M Breugem; Inger N Sierevelt; Leendert Blankevoort; C Nick van Dijk
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 3.717

3.  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

4.  Improved fixation in cementless unicompartmental knee replacement: five-year results of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  H Pandit; A D Liddle; B J L Kendrick; C Jenkins; A J Price; H S Gill; C A F Dodd; D W Murray
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2013-08-07       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Factors associated with reduced early survival in the Oxford phase III medial unicompartment knee replacement.

Authors:  Bart M Kuipers; Boudewijn J Kollen; Peter C Kaijser Bots; Bart J Burger; Jos J A M van Raay; Niek J A Tulp; Cees C P M Verheyen
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2009-08-28       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment.

Authors:  B Gandek; J E Ware; N K Aaronson; G Apolone; J B Bjorner; J E Brazier; M Bullinger; S Kaasa; A Leplege; L Prieto; M Sullivan
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation.

Authors:  S Ahlbäck
Journal:  Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh)       Date:  1968

8.  The Oxford phase III unicompartmental knee replacement in patients less than 60 years of age.

Authors:  Nanne P Kort; Jos J A M van Raay; Jim J van Horn
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-10-07       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Scoring of patellofemoral disorders.

Authors:  U M Kujala; L H Jaakkola; S K Koskinen; S Taimela; M Hurme; O Nelimarkka
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 4.772

Review 10.  Outcome and reproducibility of data concerning the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a structured literature review including arthroplasty registry data.

Authors:  Gerold Labek; Kathrin Sekyra; Wolfram Pawelka; Wolfgang Janda; Bernd Stöckl
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Midterm Results of Cementless and Cemented Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty with Mobile Meniscal Bearing: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Radosław Stempin; Wiesław Kaczmarek; Kacper Stempin; Julian Dutka
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2017-10-31

2.  Cementless Oxford Medial Unicompartmental Knee Replacement-Clinical and Radiological Results of 228 Knees with a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up.

Authors:  Benjamin Panzram; Mira Mandery; Tobias Reiner; Tobias Gotterbarm; Marcus Schiltenwolf; Christian Merle
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-05-14       Impact factor: 4.241

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.