Literature DB >> 30415412

A novel preoperative scoring system for the indication of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, as predictor of clinical outcome and satisfaction.

Alexander Antoniadis1, Dimitris Dimitriou2, Jean Pierre Canciani3, Naeder Helmy2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Proper patient selection is a crucial factor for the outcome of the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). However, there is still not a clear consensus on which patients could benefit the utmost from a UKA. The purpose of this prospective study was to introduce a novel, preoperative, predictive score (Unicompartmental Indication Score, UIS) to aid proper patient selection in UKA.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 152 patients with an average age of 68 years and a mean follow-up of 27 months were evaluated preoperatively with the UIS and postoperative at every follow-up. Correlation analysis was applied to identify potential relationships between the UIS, functional outcomes, pain relief, patient satisfaction, and range of motion. The ROC analysis was used to identify the best cutoff value of the UIS, which would have predicted an optimal outcome following UKA.
RESULTS: The majority of the patients (91%) were satisfied with the operation, with 61% reporting excellent and 30% good satisfaction. The UIS was positively correlated to the postoperative Knee Society Score (KSS) for both pain (r = 0.26, p < 0.001) and function (r = 0.31, p < 0.001). The UIS was also positively correlated to the patient satisfaction (p = 0.46, p < 0.001) and maximum postoperative flexion (r = 0.25, p < 0.001). The ROC analysis provided an ideal cutoff for UIS at 25 points (sensitivity: 75%, sensibility: 93%, area under the curve: 86%). At a mean follow-up of 27 months (range 24-37), we observed three revisions in 152 consecutive UKA with a mean UIS of 27 points (range 20-30).
CONCLUSIONS: The newly introduced UIS score might be a reliable preoperative scoring system to predict patients with excellent satisfaction, functional outcome, pain relief and possibly implant survivorship following UKA, and therefore, could help the proper patient selection and decision-making in UKA. LEVEL-OF-EVIDENCE: Prospective study, II.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical Outcome; Indication; Patient satisfaction; Patient-reported outcomes; Predictive score; Revision; Scoring system; Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA)

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30415412     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-018-3069-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   3.067


  4 in total

1.  [Comparison of the effectiveness of unicompartmental arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty based on patient scale data].

Authors:  Xiangyu Zu; Jun Wang; Ming Lu; Zongsheng Yin
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2021-12-15

2.  A radiographic model predicting the status of the anterior cruciate ligament in varus knee with osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Changquan Liu; Juncheng Ge; Cheng Huang; Weiguo Wang; Qidong Zhang; Wanshou Guo
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-06-22       Impact factor: 2.562

3.  Greater activity, better range of motion and higher quality of life following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a comparative case-control study.

Authors:  Georg Hauer; Patrick Sadoghi; Gerwin A Bernhardt; Matthias Wolf; Paul Ruckenstuhl; Andrea Fink; Andreas Leithner; Gerald Gruber
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 3.067

4.  Better short-term function after unicompartmental compared to total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Eric Tille; Franziska Beyer; Kai Auerbach; Marco Tinius; Jörg Lützner
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2021-04-02       Impact factor: 2.362

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.