Literature DB >> 27225890

Superior femoral component alignment can be achieved with Oxford microplasty instrumentation after minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Yihui Tu1, Huaming Xue2, Tong Ma1, Tao Wen1, Tao Yang1, Hui Zhang1, Minwei Cai1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Oxford microplasty (MP) instrumentation has been developed to facilitate the reproducible and consistent performance of minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (MI-UKA) operation. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic results of two groups of patients implanted using either a conventional instrumentation technique or an MP technique.
METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 108 knees in 108 patients who underwent an MI-UKA procedure using either conventionally instrumented UKA (CI-UKA) (52 knees of 52 patients) or MP-assisted UKA (MP-UKA) (56 knees of 56 patients). The clinical assessment included the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), the Knee Society Score (KSS), a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and range of motion (ROM). Complications were also recorded.
RESULTS: No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding OKS, KSS, VAS, and ROM. There were also no significant differences in terms of mechanical limb alignment and tibia implant alignment. However, the MP-UKA group showed significantly more accurate positioning of the femoral component than the CI-UKA group. Additionally, the MP-UKA group had more femoral prostheses implanted in the "satisfactory" range and fewer "outliers" than the CI-UKA group. No significant difference in complications was noted between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: This study suggested that compared with CI-UKA, MP-UKA provides significant improvements in increasing the accuracy of sagittal and coronal implantation of the femoral component and in reducing the numbers of outliers for femoral prosthetic alignment. It is advocated that the MP system should be considered when MI-UKA is performed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level IV.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical results; Component alignment; Knee arthroplasty; Mobile-bearing; Oxford; Unicompartmental

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27225890     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-016-4173-3

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


  23 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.  Computer-assisted navigation in total knee replacement: results of an initial experience in thirty-five patients.

Authors:  S David Stulberg; Peter Loan; Vineet Sarin
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  The Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement using a minimally-invasive approach.

Authors:  H Pandit; C Jenkins; K Barker; C A F Dodd; D W Murray
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2006-01

4.  Three-dimensional analysis of alignment error in using femoral intramedullary guides in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Burton Ma; William Long; John F Rudan; Randy E Ellis
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 4.757

5.  Improvement of femoral component size prediction using a C-arm intensifier guide and our established algorithm in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a report from a Chinese population.

Authors:  Yihui Tu; Huaming Xue; Minwei Cai; Tong Ma; Xiaodong Liu; Zhidao Xia
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study.

Authors:  D W Murray; J W Goodfellow; J J O'Connor
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1998-11

7.  The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system.

Authors:  F C Ewald
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement in Korean patients.

Authors:  H-C Lim; J-H Bae; S-H Song; S-J Kim
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2012-08

9.  Oxford phase 3 unicondylar knee arthroplasty through a minimally invasive approach: long-term results.

Authors:  Omar Faour-Martín; Jose Antonio Valverde-García; Miguel Angel Martín-Ferrero; Aurelio Vega-Castrillo; María Angeles de la Red Gallego; Cesar C Suárez de Puga; Luis Amigo-Liñares
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-03-17       Impact factor: 3.075

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
  9 in total

1.  What future in the treatment of osteochondral knee defects?

Authors:  Riccardo D'Ambrosi; Vincenza Ragone; Nicola Ursino
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-12

2.  Early Results of Oxford Mobile Bearing Medial Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (UKR) with the Microplasty Instrumentation: An Indian Experience.

Authors:  Sahil Gaba; Naman Wahal; Deepak Gautam; Hemant Pandit; Vijay Kumar; Rajesh Malhotra
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2018-07

3.  New Instrumentation Improves Patient Satisfaction and Component Positioning for Mobile-Bearing Medial Unicompartmental Knee Replacement.

Authors:  Rajesh Malhotra; Vijay Kumar; Naman Wahal; Arnaud Clavé; James A Kennedy; David W Murray; Hemant Pandit
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2019 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.251

4.  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

5.  Biomechanical effects of fixed-bearing femoral prostheses with different coronal positions in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Pengcheng Ma; Aikeremujiang Muheremu; Siping Zhang; Qian Zheng; Wei Wang; Kan Jiang
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2022-03-09       Impact factor: 2.359

6.  Safety and Efficacy of Unicondylar Knee Prosthesis Treatment for Unicompartmental Osteoarthritis of the Knee Joint.

Authors:  Dahua Zhang; Xiang Zhang
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2022-07-15       Impact factor: 2.809

7.  40 years of the Oxford Knee.

Authors:  W F M Jackson; K R Berend; S Spruijt
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 5.082

Review 8.  Does new instrument for Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty improve short-term clinical outcome and component alignment? A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiao Wei Sun; Fei Fan Lu; Kun Zou; Mao Hong; Qi Dong Zhang; Wan Shou Guo
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-09-07       Impact factor: 2.359

9.  Most unicompartmental knee replacement revisions could be avoided: a radiographic evaluation of revised Oxford knees in the National Joint Registry.

Authors:  James A Kennedy; Jeya Palan; Stephen J Mellon; Colin Esler; Chris A F Dodd; Hemant G Pandit; David W Murray
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 4.342

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.