Literature DB >> 30906745

Medium-term outcome of cementless, mobile-bearing, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Radosław Stempin1, Kacper Stempin2, Wiesław Kaczmarek3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cemented, mobile-bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) yields good functional results. However, radiolucent lines (RLL) are not uncommon, even in asymptomatic patients, and it has been debated whether these "physiological" RLLs are indicative of loosening. Cementless UKA may lead to fewer RLLs compared with cemented devices. The present study was designed to document mid-term outcome with an emphasis on clinical outcomes.
METHODS: We included 153 knees of 150 consecutive patients in a retrospective study. All patients had received a cementless medial mobile-bearing UKA. Patients were evaluated with use of the Knee Society Score (KSS), which was obtained at baseline and at final follow-up. The WOMAC, Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Forgotten Joint Scores (FJS-12) were administered at the final follow-up. Anteroposterior (AP) and lateral radiographs were taken at final follow-up.
RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 5 years (range, 3-7 years), implant survival was 97.1% (95% confidence interval, 91.1-99.1%). Excellent postoperative KSS, WOMAC, OKS and FJS scores were obtained. Postoperative radiography was available for 78 knees. RLL was observed in 10.3% of the cases, but no cases with complete RLLs were seen.
CONCLUSIONS: Favourable results were found for cementless, mobile-bearing UKA, with no aseptic loosening at an average follow-up of 5 years. Cementless UKA fixation may lead to a clinically "forgotten joint" and may decrease the rate of RLLs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical outcome; osteoarthritis knee; patient reported outcome; survival; unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Year:  2019        PMID: 30906745      PMCID: PMC6389574          DOI: 10.21037/atm.2018.12.50

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Transl Med        ISSN: 2305-5839


  38 in total

1.  Radiolucent lines and component stability in knee arthroplasty. Standard versus fluoroscopically-assisted radiographs.

Authors:  P Vyskocil; C Gerber; P Bamert
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1999-01

2.  Survival and functional outcome after revision of a unicompartmental to a total knee replacement: the New Zealand National Joint Registry.

Authors:  A J Pearse; G J Hooper; A Rothwell; C Frampton
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2010-04

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.  Unicompartmental or total knee replacement: the 15-year results of a prospective randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  J Newman; R V Pydisetty; C Ackroyd
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2009-01

5.  The incidence of physiological radiolucency following Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement and its relationship to outcome.

Authors:  A Gulati; R Chau; H G Pandit; H Gray; A J Price; C A F Dodd; D W Murray
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2009-07

6.  Revision of medial Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement to a total knee replacement: similar to a primary?

Authors:  Henry Wynn Jones; Warwick Chan; Timothy Harrison; Toby O Smith; Patrick Masonda; Neil P Walton
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2011-04-29       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  An analysis of the Oxford hip and knee scores and their relationship to early joint revision in the New Zealand Joint Registry.

Authors:  A G Rothwell; G J Hooper; A Hobbs; C M Frampton
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2010-03

8.  A second decade lifetable survival analysis of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Andrew J Price; Ulf Svard
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Function and quality of life following medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients 60 years of age or younger.

Authors:  E Felts; S Parratte; V Pauly; J-M Aubaniac; J-N Argenson
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2010-11-18       Impact factor: 2.256

10.  Comparison of survival and cost-effectiveness between unicondylar arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty in patients with primary osteoarthritis: a follow-up study of 50,493 knee replacements from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register.

Authors:  Esa Koskinen; Antti Eskelinen; Pekka Paavolainen; Pekka Pulkkinen; Ville Remes
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  2 in total

1.  [Research progress in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty].

Authors:  Dong Wu; Minzhi Yang; Zheng Cao; Xiangpeng Kong; Yi Wang; Renwen Guo; Wei Chai
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2020-02-15

2.  Patient-reported outcome after patient-specific unicondylar knee arthroplasty for unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Viola Freigang; Markus Rupp; Christian Pfeifer; Michael Worlicek; Stefan Radke; Stephan Deckelmann; Volker Alt; Florian Baumann
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-11-24       Impact factor: 2.362

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.