Tommaso Bonanzinga1,2, Piergiuseppe Tanzi3, Daniele Altomare4, Andrea Dorotei2, Francesco Iacono1, Maurilio Marcacci1,2. 1. Humanitas Clinical and Research Center - IRCCS, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, MI, Italy. 2. Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20090, Pieve Emanuele, MI, Italy. 3. Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Bologna, Italy. 4. Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20090, Pieve Emanuele, MI, Italy. dott.danielealtomare@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to systematically review the available literature to understand the effectiveness, the survivorship, the clinical outcomes and the complications of lateral UKA. METHODS: A review of the current literature available about lateral UKA was performed in March 2020, according to the PRISMA guidelines. Selection was based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) clinical reports of any level of evidence, (2) written in English language, (3) published from 1996 to 2020, (4) dealing with clinical data on lateral UKA. A total of 47 articles, published between 1996 and 2020, were included in the review. Quality of every article was assessed using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. RESULTS: A total of 47 studies were included. Mean mCMS was 45.27 (range 30-62). Mean age at surgery was 64.5 years (range 34.1-88.0 years). In 1741 patients (65.5%) a metal back implant was used and in 421 patients (15.8%) an all poly design was used. Several scores were used to evaluate clinical results (OKS, AKSS, IKS, KOOS, WOMAC, VAS). Range of motion improved with an overall mean value of 120.3° (range: 105.9°-143.3°). The mean follow-up was 60.7 months (range, 7-204 months), mean survivorship (absence of a revision) with a minimum 60 months of follow-up was 88.6% (range 74.5-100) and mean satisfaction of patients was 78.5% (range 41.0-97.9). CONCLUSIONS: Lateral UKA seems to be an effective solution to manage lateral osteoarthritis (OA), based on preliminary results, with survivorship and satisfaction rate comparable to medial UKA and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Nonetheless, this review highlights that the quality of studies available in current literature is low. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review of level IV studies.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to systematically review the available literature to understand the effectiveness, the survivorship, the clinical outcomes and the complications of lateral UKA. METHODS: A review of the current literature available about lateral UKA was performed in March 2020, according to the PRISMA guidelines. Selection was based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) clinical reports of any level of evidence, (2) written in English language, (3) published from 1996 to 2020, (4) dealing with clinical data on lateral UKA. A total of 47 articles, published between 1996 and 2020, were included in the review. Quality of every article was assessed using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. RESULTS: A total of 47 studies were included. Mean mCMS was 45.27 (range 30-62). Mean age at surgery was 64.5 years (range 34.1-88.0 years). In 1741 patients (65.5%) a metal back implant was used and in 421 patients (15.8%) an all poly design was used. Several scores were used to evaluate clinical results (OKS, AKSS, IKS, KOOS, WOMAC, VAS). Range of motion improved with an overall mean value of 120.3° (range: 105.9°-143.3°). The mean follow-up was 60.7 months (range, 7-204 months), mean survivorship (absence of a revision) with a minimum 60 months of follow-up was 88.6% (range 74.5-100) and mean satisfaction of patients was 78.5% (range 41.0-97.9). CONCLUSIONS: Lateral UKA seems to be an effective solution to manage lateral osteoarthritis (OA), based on preliminary results, with survivorship and satisfaction rate comparable to medial UKA and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Nonetheless, this review highlights that the quality of studies available in current literature is low. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review of level IV studies.