Yihui Tu1, Huaming Xue2, Tong Ma1, Tao Wen1, Tao Yang1, Hui Zhang1, Minwei Cai1. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, Yangpu District Central Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, 450 Tengyue Road, Shanghai, China. 2. Department of Orthopaedics, Yangpu District Central Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University School of Medicine, 450 Tengyue Road, Shanghai, China. x11h22m33@126.com.
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) orMP-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.
RCT Entities:
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.
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
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
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
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
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