Literature DB >> 2912616

Medial unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee. Use of the L-cut and comparison with the tibial inset method.

J Swienckowski1, B J Page.   

Abstract

Forty-four medial unicompartmental arthroplasties were performed between August 1982 and August 1985 using the L-cut resection and guides. These were compared with 19 medial unicompartmental arthroplasties performed between September 1974 and August 1982 in which the tibial plateau was prepared by the conventional tibial inset method. The L-cut was more precise due to the use of guides. This method allowed the tibial component to be seated directly on the cortical rim of the medial proximal tibial plateau for better support. There was a direct relationship between the placement of the tibial component and the clinical results. In both groups, those patients approaching a tibial prosthesis placement of 90 degrees in the coronal plane and 80 degrees in the sagittal plane had the best clinical results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2912616

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  9 in total

1.  Robotic arm-assisted UKA improves tibial component alignment: a pilot study.

Authors:  Jess H Lonner; Thomas K John; Michael A Conditt
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-07-11       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Survivorship and patient satisfaction of robotic-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum two-year follow-up.

Authors:  Andrew D Pearle; Jelle P van der List; Lily Lee; Thomas M Coon; Todd A Borus; Martin W Roche
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2017-02-06       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Assessment of accuracy of robotically assisted unicompartmental arthroplasty.

Authors:  Ali Mofidi; Johannes F Plate; Bo Lu; Michael A Conditt; Jason E Lang; Gary G Poehling; Riyaz H Jinnah
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-04-18       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Patient-specific positioning guides do not consistently achieve the planned implant position in UKA.

Authors:  Justin A M J van Leeuwen; Stephan M Röhrl
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-08-12       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 5.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a review of literature.

Authors:  Bernardino Saccomanni
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 2.980

6.  Tibial component alignment and risk of loosening in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a radiographic and radiostereometric study.

Authors:  P Barbadoro; A Ensini; A Leardini; M d'Amato; A Feliciangeli; A Timoncini; F Amadei; C Belvedere; S Giannini
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-06-28       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Late spontaneous haemarthrosis: an unusual complication following an unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jan De Raet; Eddy Verhaven; Stefan Kemnitz
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-12-23       Impact factor: 4.114

8.  Retrospective Clinical and Radiological Outcomes after Robotic Assisted Bicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Cuneyt Tamam; Johannes F Plate; Marco Augart; Gary G Poehling; Riyaz H Jinnah
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2015-09-03

Review 9.  Evidence-based surgical technique for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Tae Kyun Kim; Anurag Mittal; Prashant Meshram; Woo Hyun Kim; Sang Min Choi
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2021-01-07
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.