Literature DB >> 27506725

Total Knee Arthroplasty After Failed Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. Clinical Results, Radiologic Findings, and Technical Tips.

Estrella Borrego Paredes1, Pablo Barrena Sánchez1, David Serrano Toledano1, Andrés I Puente González1, Salvador Fornell Pérez1, Gabriel Domecq Fernández de Bobadilla1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The loss of anatomic references and bone stock turns unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) revision surgery difficult, and according to some authors, it is technically as challenging as a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revision surgery.
METHODS: A retrospective review of 559 Oxford medial UKA was performed between 2007 and 2013. Nineteen knees were revised to TKA for reasons other than infection, most commonly for osteoarthritis progression.
RESULTS: The most frequent cause of failure in our series was osteoarthritis progression (10 cases, 52.63%). In 15 patients (78.95%), tibial stems were needed, and in 10 (55.5%), metallic blocks for augmentation of tibial plateau were used. Postoperative radiographic studies showed a correct implant alignment, preserving adequate joint line (24.8 mm), and patellar (1.1 mm) height (according to Insall-Salvati). After a mean follow-up of 21 months (range 6-51) mean values of 78.8 (standard deviation [SD] = 16.8) and 62.3 (SD = 19.6) were obtained for the physical and mental scores of the Knee Society Score test. In the SF-36 tests mean values of 45.2 (SD = 7.6) and 53 (SD = 5.2) were obtained for the physical and mental scores respectively. In one case, a varus/valgus instability occurred intraoperatively and it required revision with a prosthesis with higher constriction. No thromboembolic or infectious events were observed during postoperative follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Following a standardized technique, UKA revision surgery can be achieved with TKA in almost every case despite bone stock loss and lack of anatomic landmarks.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  arthroplasty; knee; revision; total; unicompartmental

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27506725     DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.06.035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  5 in total

1.  Revision of partial knee to total knee arthroplasty with use of patient-specific instruments results in acceptable femoral rotation.

Authors:  Martijn G M Schotanus; Elke Thijs; B Boonen; B Kerens; B Jong; Nanne P Kort
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Elastomeric Lumbar Total Disc Replacement: Clinical and Radiological Results With Minimum 84 Months Follow-Up.

Authors:  Luiz Pimenta; Luis Marchi; Leonardo Oliveira; Joes Nogueira-Neto; Etevaldo Coutinho; Rodrigo Amaral
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-03-30

3.  Effects of Lower Limb Alignment and Tibial Component Inclination on the Biomechanics of Lateral Compartment in Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Peng-Fei Wen; Wan-Shou Guo; Fu-Qiang Gao; Qi-Dong Zhang; Ju-An Yue; Li-Ming Cheng; Guang-Duo Zhu
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2017-11-05       Impact factor: 2.628

4.  Good results with minimally invasive unicompartmental knee resurfacing after 10-year follow-up.

Authors:  Martin H Redish; Peter Fennema
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2017-11-22

5.  Analysis of the following Related Surgeries of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty and Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Taiwanese National Health Insurance Research Database Population-Based Study.

Authors:  Shu-Hao Chang; Chune-Chen Lee; Chia-Ying Lin; Yu-Feng Kuo; Ching-Chuan Jiang; Yong-Chen Chen
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 3.411

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.