Low percentage of surgeons meet the minimum recommended unicompartmental knee arthroplasty usage thresholds: Analysis of 3037 Surgeons from Three National Joint Registries

A Review of Current Approaches to Pain Management in Knee Osteoarthritis with a Focus on Italian Clinical Landscape

The global cases of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) are projected to increase by 74.9% by 2050. Currently, over half of patients remain dissatisfied with their pain relief. This review addresses unmet needs for moderate-to-severe KOA pain; it offers evidence and insights for improved management. Italian experts from the fields of rheumatology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, orthopedics, primary care, and pain therapy have identified several key issues. They emphasized the need for standardized care protocols to address inconsistencies in patient management across different specialties. Early diagnosis is crucial, as cartilage responds better to early protective and structural therapies. Faster access to physiatrist evaluation and reimbursement for physical, rehabilitative, and pharmacological treatments, including intra-articular (IA) therapy, could reduce access disparities. Concerns surround the adverse effects of oral pharmacological treatments, highlighting the need for safer alternatives. Patient satisfaction with corticosteroids and hyaluronic acid-based IA therapies reduces over time and there is no consensus on the optimal IA therapy protocol. Surgery should be reserved for severe symptoms and radiographic KOA evidence, as chronic pain post-surgery poses significant societal and economic burdens. The experts advocate for a multidisciplinary approach, promoting interaction and collaboration between specialists and general practitioners, to enhance KOA care and treatment consistency in Italy.

Associated patellofemoral osteoarthritis is not a contraindication for unicompartmental knee replacement. Report of one hundred ten prostheses with an average 6-year follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Associated patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis (APFJ-OA) has typically been considered a contraindication for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) in the treatment of femorotibial joint osteoarthritis. However, this contraindication is being challenged. The aim of this study was to assess clinical and functional outcomes, complications, and implant survival in medial or lateral UKA, regardless of clinical symptoms or radiographic signs of APFJ-OA.

METHODS

This retrospective, comparative study included patients treated with medial or lateral UKA regardless of preoperative symptoms or signs of APFJ-OA, with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Intraoperatively, knees were subdivided based on APFJ-OA grade, according to the Outerbridge classification. Clinical and functional outcomes were analyzed using the 2011 Knee Society Score (KSS) at the last follow-up control. APFJ-OA was treated systematically, in a tailored, stepwise fashion according to its severity. Complications and implant survival rates were evaluated. Two-sided paired T-test, ANOVA, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used with a significance level of 5%.

RESULTS

Finally, 110 UKAs were assessed 81 (73.6%) medial and 29 (26.4%) laterals. The average follow-up was 6 years (2-19.5). According to Outerbridge, 22 knees (20%) were in grade 2, 59 (53.6%) were in grade 3, and 29 (26.4%) were in grade 4. All three groups showed a statistically significant increase in KSS scores and range of motion. There were no significant differences in clinical KSS improvement and flexion contracture between Outerbridge groups (average 35.7 and -4.9, respectively). Group 3 showed statistically significant improvement in functional KSS when compared to group 2 (68.8 vs 61.2). In maximum flexion, groups 3 and 4 did significantly better than group 2 (20° vs 15°). Three prostheses (2.7%) needed revision after 7, 8.6, and 12 years due to aseptic tibial loosening. Implant survival was 100% at 5 (64 of 64), 97% at 7 (30 of 31), 93% at 9 (14 of 15), and 89% at 12 years, respectively (8 of 9).

CONCLUSION

Clinical and functional results, complications, and survival of medial or lateral UKA were not negatively affected by APFJ-OA assessed intraoperatively using the Outerbridge classification after an average follow-up of 6 years. We consider that APFJ-OA is not a contraindication for UKA when treated systematically according to its severity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Champions in usage of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty : The story behind the Danish success

Historically, the use of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (mUKA) as treatment for end-stage anteromedial osteoarthritis (AMOA) of the knee was limited by contraindications due to age, weight, and activity level; however, now evidence-based, validated, and less selective criteria are used rendering nearly 50% of end-stage OA patients eligible for mUKA. Recent studies have showcased benefits, such as shorter hospital stays, cost efficiency, and comparable functional outcomes to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Notably, revision rates have been shown to markedly decrease with increased usage, with an ideal usage of > 30% but an acceptable usage of 20-60%. The usage of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) varies among countries, with Denmark achieving a notably higher usage compared to Sweden, the UK, the Netherlands, the USA and Germany. This article investigates potential factors contributing to Denmark having a higher national usage of mUKA, surpassing the recommended threshold of a usage > 20%. We explore the tradition for national alliances and streamlined surgical education as possible explanations of this development. These insights offer valuable perspectives for potentially optimizing surgical approaches and implant choices in the surgical treatment of end-stage AMOA of the knee across diverse healthcare settings, underscoring the impact of collective strategies in advancing knee arthroplasty practices, ultimately benefiting patients.

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty questionnaire (UniQ-study): Unknown is unloved

BACKGROUND

Almost 50% of the patients requiring knee replacement are suitable for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). However, national registries have shown a use far below 50%.

AIM

The aim of this study was to identify the factors that could influence the use of UKA.

METHODS

A questionnaire was conducted among practicing knee surgeons of the Dutch Orthopedic Association. The questionnaire was classified into three domains: surgeon, patient selection, and professional opinion. Associations between the domains and UKA volume and contra-indications were tested using Pearson's chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Of the 113 included respondents, 40% had no hands-on exposure during residency. Frequently reported contra-indications were obesity (68%), lateral osteophytes (21%), chondrocalcinosis (20%), and age (20%). Medial partial thickness lesions were considered a contra-indication by 49% and lateral joint space narrowing by 61% of the respondents. Respondents perceived UKA to outperform total knee arthroplasty regarding all outcomes, except survival (1.8% versus 42%). The reported barriers for UKA use were insufficient experience (20%), high revision rates (20%), and low hospital volume (16%), whereas 60% did not experience any at all. Hands-on UKA exposure during residency was associated with an increased use of correct indications. Furthermore, the use of correct indications was associated with an increased UKA volume.

CONCLUSION

We showed a low UKA exposure during residency and considerable variations in contra-indications. These factors may contribute to an underuse of UKA. Improved UKA training could lead to increased experience and better patient selection among surgeons and consequently a higher use of medial UKA.

Trends in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty among 138 international experienced arthroplasty knee surgeons

Purpose

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is an established option for treating isolated unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (OA), but controversies still exist about patient selection, indications, perioperative management and alignment goals. This survey was designed to understand the current trends of experienced arthroplasty knee surgeons performing UKA.

Methods

An online questionnaire was created with SurveyMonkey® to assess global tendencies in the utilization of UKA. A link to the survey was shared with all ESSKA (European Society for Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy) members. The questionnaire consisted of free and multiple-choice questions and was divided into four sections: demographic information, the surgical activity of the respondents, indications for surgery and postoperative alignment goals.

Results

A total of 138 ESSKA members from 34 different countries completed the survey. A total of 81 % of the responders performed fewer than 50 UKAs per year; 53 % of UKAs represented less than 20 % of their knee replacements; 71 % used mainly or only fixed-bearing implants; 81 % performed UKA in a shorter time compared to TKA; and 61 % and 72 % were interested in custom-made UKA and robotics, respectively. Thirty-six percent considered a minimum postoperative alignment of 0° for medial UKA, and 32 % considered 10° as the maximum valgus deformity for lateral UKA. Fifty-five percent had no minimum age cut-off, 47 % had no BMI cut-off, and 57 % believed TKA was better than UKA in knees with concomitant high-grade patellofemoral OA. Approximately 50 % of the surgeons desired a coronal alignment that was the same as the predegeneration alignment.

Conclusion

A high level of agreement was reached regarding the following: preference for fixed-bearing UKAs, lower surgical time for UKA compared to TKA, interest in custom-made and robotic UKAs, no age and weight cut-off, TKA preferred in the presence of patellofemoral OA, and a final alignment goal of the predegenerative state both for medial and lateral. There was no agreement regarding length of stay, rehabilitation protocol, preoperative varus and valgus cut-off values, and treatment in cases of absence of anterior cruciate ligament or previous osteotomy.

Malposition is main cause of failure of Oxford mobile-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Aims

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is the preferred treatment for anterior medial knee osteoarthritis (OA) owing to the rapid postoperative recovery. However, the risk factors for UKA failure remain controversial.

Methods

The clinical data of Oxford mobile-bearing UKAs performed between 2011 and 2017 with a minimum follow-up of five years were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic, surgical, and follow-up data were collected. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify the risk factors that contribute to UKA failure. Kaplan-Meier survival was used to compare the effect of the prosthesis position on UKA survival.

Results

A total of 407 patients who underwent UKA were included in the study. The mean age of patients was 61.8 years, and the mean follow-up period of the patients was 91.7 months. The mean Knee Society Score (KSS) preoperatively and at the last follow-up were 64.2 and 89.7, respectively (p = 0.001). Overall, 28 patients (6.9%) with UKA underwent revision due to prosthesis loosening (16 patients), dislocation (eight patients), and persistent pain (four patients). Cox proportional hazards model analysis identified malposition of the prostheses as a high-risk factor for UKA failure (p = 0.007). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the five-year survival rate of the group with malposition was 85.1%, which was significantly lower than that of the group with normal position (96.2%; p < 0.001).

Conclusion

UKA constitutes an effective method for treating anteromedial knee OA, with an excellent five-year survival rate. Aseptic loosening caused by prosthesis malposition was identified as the main cause of UKA failure. Surgeons should pay close attention to prevent the potential occurrence of this problem.

Patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction after revisions of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasties for unexplained pain vs aseptic loosening

PURPOSE

Does patients revised for unexplained pain after mUKA present the same PROM and satisfaction scores 1-3 years after revision as patients revised for aseptic loosening?".

METHODS

104 patients undergoing revision of mUKA's for the indications unexplained pain and aseptic loosening were included in the period January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2020. from the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Register. 52 patients were revised for unexplained pain and 52 for aseptic loosening. Patient demographics did not differ between the two groups. PROMs [Oxford Knee Score (OKS), EQ-5D-5L, Forgotten Joint Score (FJS)] and questions about satisfaction with the surgery were sent to digitally secured mailboxes. Pearson's Chi-square test and Wilcoxon Rank Sum test were used to test for statistical differences between groups.

RESULTS

The median OKS 1-3 years after revision was 26 (IQR 22) for unexplained pain vs 34 (IQR 12) for aseptic loosening, p = 0.033. The median EQ-5D-5L Index after revision was 0.7 (IQR 0.6) for unexplained vs 0.8 (IQR 0.1) for aseptic loosening, p = 0.014. The median FJS after revision was 48 (IQR 10) for unexplained pain vs 52 (IQR 14) for aseptic loosening, p = 0.1. The mean satisfaction with the surgery on a 0-100 scale (100 = not satisfied; 0 = very satisfied) was 55 (IQR 60) for unexplained pain vs 50 (IQR 67) for aseptic loosening, p = 0.087, and patients revised for unexplained pain were less likely to find their knee problem importantly improved (p = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing revision of mUKAs for unexplained pain presented poor postoperative PROM scores, and PROM scores were worse compared to those of patients revised for aseptic loosening. Patients revised for unexplained pain were less likely to find their knee problem importantly improved. This study support the evidence against revisions for unexplained pain.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Robotic-arm assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty system has a learning curve of 11 cases and increased operating time

PURPOSE

UKA has higher revision risk, particularly for lower volume surgeons. While robotic-arm assisted systems allow for increased accuracy, introduction of new systems has been associated with learning curves. The aim of this study was to determine the learning curve of a UKA robotic-arm assisted system. The hypothesis was that this may affect operative times, patient outcomes, limb alignment, and component placement.

METHODS

Between 2017 and 2021, five surgeons performed 152 consecutive robotic-arm assisted primary medial UKA, and measurements of interest were recorded. Patient outcomes were measured with Oxford Knee Score, EuroQol-5D, and Forgotten Joint Score at 6 weeks, 1 year, and 2 years. Surgeons were grouped into 'low' and 'high' usage groups based on total UKA (manual and robotic) performed per year.

RESULTS

A learning curve of 11 cases was found with operative time (p < 0.01), femoral rotation (p = 0.02), and insert sizing (p = 0.03), which highlighted areas that require care during the learning phase. Despite decreased 6-week EQ-5D-5L VAS in the proficiency group (77 cf. 85, p < 0.01), no difference was found with implant survival (98.2%) between phases (p = 0.15), or between 'high' and 'low' usage surgeons (p = 0.23) at 36 months. This suggested that the learning curve did not lead to early adverse effects in this patient cohort.

CONCLUSION

Introduction of a UKA robotic-arm assisted system showed learning curves for operative times and insert sizing but not for implant survival at early follow-up. The short learning curve regardless of UKA usage indicated that robotic-arm assisted UKA may be particularly useful for low-usage surgeons.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Retrospective cohort study.

Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Patients Have Lower Joint Awareness and Higher Function at 5 Years Compared to Total Knee Arthroplasties: A Matched Comparison

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate postoperative outcomes at minimum 5-year follow-up in patients following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) compared to a matched cohort of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients.

METHODS

Patients who had primarily medial compartment osteoarthritis (OA) who met criteria for medial UKA underwent TKA or medial UKA between 2014 and 2015 at a single institution, matched for age, sex, and body mass index. There were 127 UKAs in 120 patients and 118 TKAs in 116 patients included with minimum 5-year follow-up (range, 6 to 8). Mean age was 69 years (range, 59 to 79) and 71 years (range, 62 to 80) in the UKA and TKA groups, respectively (P = .049).

RESULTS

Patients who underwent UKA had significantly higher mean (±SD) Forgotten Joint Scores (87 ± 20 versus 59 ± 34, P < .001); higher Knee Society Scores (88 ± 14 versus 75 ± 21, P < .001); and lower Numeric Pain Rating Scores (0.8 ± 1.6 versus 1.9 ± 2.2, P < .001). Survivorship free from all-cause revision was 96% (95% CI = 93%-99%) and 99% (95% CI = 97%-100%) at 5 years for TKA and UKA, respectively (P = .52). There were 8 both component revisions in the TKA group within 5 years from the date of surgery and 2 UKA conversions to TKA after 5-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Patients who have medial compartment OA and underwent UKA had significantly lower joint awareness, decreased pain, improved function, and higher satisfaction compared to matched TKA patients at minimum 5-year follow-up while maintaining excellent survivorship.

Obese Patients Achieve Good Improvements in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Despite a Lower Preoperative Score

BACKGROUND

In this study, we examined the association between obesity and patient-reported outcome measures after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (MUKA), assessed through score changes, Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS), and minimal important change (MIC). Second, the association between obesity and early readmissions was examined.

METHODS

A total of 450 MUKAs (mean body mass index [BMI] 30.3, range, 19.6-53.1), performed from February 2016 to December 2020, were grouped using BMI: <30, 30-34.9, and >34.9. Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and Activity and Participation Questionnaire (APQ) were assessed preoperatively and at 3, 12, and 24 months, postoperatively. The 12-month PASS and MIC were also assessed, defining PASS as OKS = 30, MIC-OKS as change in OKS = 8, and MIC-FJS as change in FJS = 14.

RESULTS

No significant differences in OKS change were found between BMI groups. After 12 months, patients who had a BMI of 30-34.9 had lower change in FJS (estimate -8.1, 95% CI -14.9 to -1.4) and were less likely to reach PASS (odds ratio 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.7) as well as MIC-FJS (odds ratio 0.5, 95% CI 0.2-0.9). Both obese groups had lower change in APQ after 12 months. Differences in 90-day readmission rates were nonsignificant between groups.

CONCLUSION

Our findings of no differences in OKS improvement between BMI groups and achieving MIC for BMI > 34.9 suggest good improvements in obese patients despite lower preoperative scores, supporting contemporary indications for MUKA. Lower APQ development and achievement of 12-month PASS may be used when addressing expectations of recovery.

Medial bicompartmental arthroplasty patients display more normal gait and improved satisfaction, compared to matched total knee arthroplasty patients

PURPOSE

Medial bicompartmental arthroplasty, the combination of ipsilateral medial unicompartmental and patellofemoral arthroplasty, is an alternative to total knee arthroplasty for patients with medial tibiofemoral and severe patellofemoral arthritis, when the lateral tibiofemoral compartment and anterior cruciate ligament are intact. This study reports the gait and subjective outcomes following medial bicompartmental arthroplasty.

METHODS

Fifty-five subjects were measured on the instrumented treadmill at top walking speeds, using standard metrics of gait. Modular, single-stage, medial bicompartmental arthroplasty subjects (n = 16) were compared to age, body mass index, height- and sex-matched healthy (n = 19) and total knee arthroplasty (n = 20) subjects. Total knee arthroplasty subjects with pre-operative evidence of tricompartmental osteoarthritis or anterior cruciate ligament dysfunction were excluded. The vertical component of ground reaction force and temporospatial measurements were compared using Kruskal-Wallis, then Mann-Whitney test with Bonferroni correction (α = 0.05). Oxford Knee and EuroQoL EQ-5D scores were compared.

RESULTS

Objectively, the medial bicompartmental arthroplasty top walking speed of 6.7 ± 0.8 km/h was 0.5 km/h (7%) slower than that of healthy controls (p = 0.2), but 1.3 km/h (24%) faster than that of total knee arthroplasty subjects (5.4 ± 0.6 km/h, p < 0.001). Medial bicompartmental arthroplasty recorded more normal maximum weight acceptance (p < 0.001) and mid-stance forces (p = 0.03) than total knee arthroplasty subjects, with 11 cm (15%) longer steps (p < 0.001) and 21 cm (14%) longer strides (p = 0.006). Subjectively, medial bicompartmental arthroplasty subjects reported Oxford Knee Scores of median 41 (interquartile range 38.8-45.5) compared to total knee arthroplasty Oxford Knee Scores of 38 (interquartile range 30.5-41, p < 0.02). Medial bicompartmental arthroplasty subjects reported EQ-5D median 0.88 (interquartile range 0.84-0.94) compared to total knee arthroplasty median 0.81 (interquartile range 0.73-0.89, p < 0.02.) CONCLUSION: This study finds that, in the treatment of medial tibiofemoral osteoarthritis with severe patellofemoral arthritis, medial bicompartmental arthroplasty results in nearer-normal gait and improved patient-reported outcomes compared to total knee arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

The compartmental approach to revision of partial knee arthroplasty results in nearer-normal gait and improved patient reported outcomes compared to total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

This study investigated the gait and patient reported outcome measures of subjects converted from a partial knee arthroplasty to combined partial knee arthroplasty, using a compartmental approach. Healthy subjects and primary total knee arthroplasty patients were used as control groups.

METHODS

Twenty-three patients converted from partial to combined partial knee arthroplasty were measured on the instrumented treadmill at top walking speeds, using standard gait metrics. Data were compared to healthy controls (n = 22) and primary posterior cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty subjects (n = 23) where surgery were performed for one or two-compartment osteoarthritis. Groups were matched for age, sex and body mass index. At the time of gait analysis, combined partial knee arthroplasty subjects were median 17 months post-revision surgery (range 4-81 months) while the total knee arthroplasty group was median 16 months post-surgery (range 6-150 months). Oxford Knee Scores and EuroQol-5D 5L scores were recorded at the time of treadmill assessment, and results analysed by question and domain.

RESULTS

Subjects revised from partial to combined partial knee arthroplasty walked 16% faster than total knee arthroplasty (mean top walking speed 6.4 ± 0.8 km/h, vs. 5.5 ± 0.7 km/h p = 0.003), demonstrating nearer-normal weight-acceptance rate (p < 0.001), maximum weight-acceptance force (p < 0.006), mid-stance force (p < 0.03), contact time (p < 0.02), double support time (p < 0.009), step length (p = 0.003) and stride length (p = 0.051) compared to primary total knee arthroplasty. Combined partial knee arthroplasty subjects had a median Oxford Knee Score of 43 (interquartile range 39-47) vs. 38 (interquartile range 32-41, p < 0.02) and reported a median EQ-5D 0.94 (interquartile range 0.87-1.0) vs. 0.84 (interquartile range 0.80-0.89, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

This study finds that a compartmental approach to native compartment degeneration following partial knee arthroplasty results in nearer-normal gait and improved patient satisfaction compared to total knee arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

High usage of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty negatively influences total knee arthroplasty revision rate

PURPOSE

Surgeons with higher medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) usage have lower UKA revision rates. However, an increase in UKA usage may cause a decrease of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) usage. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of UKA usage on revision rates and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) of UKA, TKA, and combined UKA + TKA results.

METHODS

Using the New Zealand Registry Database, surgeons were divided into six groups based on their medial UKA usage: < 1%, 1-5%, 5-10%, 10-20%, 20-30% and > 30%. A comparison of UKA, TKA and UKA + TKA revision rates and PROMs using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 91,895 knee arthroplasties were identified, of which 8,271 were UKA (9.0%). Surgeons with higher UKA usage had lower UKA revision rates, but higher TKA revision rates. The lowest TKA and combined UKA + TKA revision rates were observed for surgeons performing 1-5% UKA, compared to the highest TKA and UKA + TKA revision rates which were seen for surgeons using > 30% UKA (p < 0.001 TKA; p < 0.001 UKA + TKA). No clinically important differences in UKA + TKA OKS scores were seen between UKA usage groups at 6 months, 5 years, or 10 years.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons with higher medial UKA usage have lower UKA revision rates; however, this comes at the cost of a higher combined UKA + TKA revision rate that is proportionate to the UKA usage. There was no difference in TKA + UKA OKS scores between UKA usage groups. A small increase in TKA revision rate was observed for high-volume UKA users (> 30%), when compared to other UKA usage clusters. A significant decrease in UKA revision rate observed in high-volume UKA surgeons offsets the slight increase in TKA revision rate, suggesting that UKA should be performed by specialist UKA surgeons.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, Retrospective therapeutic study.

Measuring appropriate need for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: results of the MANUKA study

PURPOSE

Indications for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are controversial. Studies based solely on radiographic criteria suggest up to 49% of patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) are suitable for UKA. In contrast, the 'Appropriate use criteria' (AUC), developed by the AAOS, apply clinical and radiographic criteria to guide surgical treatment of knee OA. The aim of this study was to analyze patient suitability for TKA, UKA and osteotomy using both radiographic criteria and AUC in a cohort of 300 consecutive knee OA patients.

METHODS

Included were consecutive patients with clinical and radiographic signs of knee OA referred to a specialist clinic. Collected were demographic data, radiographic wear patterns and clinical findings that were analyzed using the AUC. A comparison of the radiographic wear patterns with the treatment suggested by the AUC as well as the Surgeon Treatment Decision was performed.

RESULTS

There were 397 knees in 300 patients available for analysis. Median age was 68 [IQR 15], BMI 30 [6] with 55% females. Excellent consistency for both the radiographic criteria and the AUC criteria was found. Based on radiological criteria, 41% of knees were suitable for UKA. However, when using the AUC criteria, UKA was the appropriate treatment in only 13.3% of knees. In 19.1% of knees, no surgical treatment was appropriate at the visit, based on the collected data.

CONCLUSION

Application of isolated radiologic criteria in patients with knee OA results in a UKA candidacy is misleadingly high. AUC that are based on both radiological and clinical criteria suggest UKA is appropriate in less than 15% of patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III retrospective study.

Robotics improves alignment accuracy and reduces early revision rates for UKA in the hands of low-volume UKA surgeons

PURPOSE

It is known that in uni-compartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) low-volume surgeons have a higher complication and revision rate than high-volume surgeons. Further, robotic-assisted UKA leads to lower early revision rate as well as fewer limb and joint line outliers compared to conventional UKA. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively analyze the outliers' and revision rate of low-volume UKA surgeons with different robotic systems at short-term follow-up.

METHODS

In this case-control study, 103 robotic-assisted UKAs were included. The procedures were performed between 2016 and 2019 from two low-volume UKA surgeons with an imageless (IL) (63 patients) and image-based (IB) (40 patients) robotic system. Alignment outliers, joint line (JL) reconstruction, complication and revision rates of the two different robotic systems were analyzed. The minimum follow-up was two years. Outliers were defined as a postoperative valgus malalignment greater than 182°. The surgery time for all procedures was evaluated.

RESULTS

The overall revision rate was 3.9% (4 of 103). Two occurred in the IB group (5.0%) and two in the IL group (3.2%). No valgus malalignment outliers were observed in both groups. The mean JL was not distalized by more than 2 mm in both groups (IL: 1.3 ± 1.6 mm vs. IB: 1.8 ± 0.9 mm, p value 0.08). The IL procedures had a significant lower mean surgery time (55 ± 13 min vs. 68 ± 14, p value 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted UKA is a safe procedure in the hand of low-volume UKA surgeons. Robotic-assisted UKA minimizes overcorrection into valgus mal-alignment. Low revision rates are observed at short-term follow-up for robotic-assisted UKA. The choice of the different robotic systems has no impact on the outcome.