Literature DB >> 36148179

High tibial osteotomy with an external fixator or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for varus knee in young patients?

Amit Kumar Yadav1, Mangal Parihar2, Ilaria Mariani3, Riccardo Giorgino4,5, Laura Mangiavini4,5, Nicola Ursino4, Riccardo D'Ambrosi4,5.   

Abstract

Purpose: This study compares the functional results and survivorship of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and high tibial osteotomy (HTO) with an external fixator for medial compartment osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.
Methods: Two cohorts of patients aged less than 60 years who had undergone either a cemented medial mobile-bearing UKA or an HTO with an external fixator were included in the study. The first cohort included patients undergoing a series of 197 consecutive medial UKA procedures (UKA group). The second cohort consisted of 60 consecutive patients undergoing HTO with an external fixator (HTO group). Each patient was assessed based on the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and the Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score/questionnaire. A clinical evaluation was conducted on the day of the surgery (T0) and at the follow-up visit (T1) (minimum follow-up time was 60 months). Complications and failures resulting from the surgery were recorded for each patient.
Results: Only the age of the patients at the pre-operative time differed significantly between the two groups, with the HTO group being significantly younger (47.7 ± 8.0 versus 55.8 ± 2.2).After the final follow-up visit, all scores improved in both groups (p < 0.05).IKDC and Oxford scores were higher for the UKA group (p < 0.05). In the HTO group, three complications occurred (5%), including two superficial infections and one deep infection. On the other hand, the UKA group reported four complications (2%): three aseptic mobilisations and one infection requiring revision surgery. There was no difference in the complication rate between the two groups (p = 0.208). Conclusions: In young patients (<60 years) with an isolated medial knee OA, both HTO and UKA led to good to excellent clinical results with a low rate of complications at mid-term follow-up; both surgical procedures may be considered in this patient population. Level of evidence: Level III.
© 2022 Professor P K Surendran Memorial Education Foundation. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  High tibial osteotomy; IKDC; Medial knee osteoarthritis; Oxford knee score; Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Year:  2022        PMID: 36148179      PMCID: PMC9486030          DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2022.09.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop        ISSN: 0972-978X


  28 in total

1.  Preoperative Expectations of Patients Undergoing Knee Surgery.

Authors:  Kali N Stevens; Vidushan Nadarajah; Julio J Jauregui; Xuyang Song; Shaun H Medina; Michael P Smuda; Jonathan D Packer; R Frank Henn
Journal:  J Knee Surg       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 2.757

2.  Comparison of HTO with articular cartilage surgery and UKA in unicompartmental OA.

Authors:  Yoon Sang Jeon; Chi Hoon Ahn; Myung-Ku Kim
Journal:  J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.118

3.  Pulsed electromagnetic fields improve pain management and clinical outcomes after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A prospective randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Riccardo D'Ambrosi; Chiara Ursino; Stefania Setti; Michele Scelsi; Nicola Ursino
Journal:  J ISAKOS       Date:  2022-05-25

4.  Running does not increase symptoms or structural progression in people with knee osteoarthritis: data from the osteoarthritis initiative.

Authors:  Grace H Lo; Sarra M Musa; Jeffrey B Driban; Andrea M Kriska; Timothy E McAlindon; Richard B Souza; Nancy J Petersen; Kristi L Storti; Charles B Eaton; Marc C Hochberg; Rebecca D Jackson; C Kent Kwoh; Michael C Nevitt; Maria E Suarez-Almazor
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2018-05-04       Impact factor: 2.980

5.  Similar rates of return to sports and BMI reduction regardless of age, gender and preoperative BMI as seen in matched cohort of hypoallergenic and standard Cobalt Chromium medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Riccardo D'Ambrosi; Filippo Maria Anghilieri; Katia Corona; Ilaria Mariani; Federico Valli; Nicola Ursino; Michael Tobias Hirschmann
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-02-07       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 6.  High Tibial Osteotomy: Review of Techniques and Biomechanics.

Authors:  Xiaoyu Liu; Zhenxian Chen; Yongchang Gao; Jing Zhang; Zhongmin Jin
Journal:  J Healthc Eng       Date:  2019-05-02       Impact factor: 2.682

7.  Gait comparison of unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasties with healthy controls.

Authors:  G G Jones; M Kotti; A V Wiik; R Collins; M J Brevadt; R K Strachan; J P Cobb
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 5.082

Review 8.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, an enigma, and the ten enigmas of medial UKA.

Authors:  Anurag Mittal; Prashant Meshram; Woo Hyun Kim; Tae Kyun Kim
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2020-09-02

9.  Can accuracy of component alignment be improved with Oxford UKA Microplasty® instrumentation?

Authors:  Jonathan Patrick Ng; Jason Chi Ho Fan; Lawrence Chun Man Lau; Tycus Tao Sun Tse; Samuel Yik Cheung Wan; Yuk Wah Hung
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 2.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.