Comparable incidence of periprosthetic tibial fractures in cementless and cemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A Comparison of the Periprosthetic Fracture Rate of Cemented and Cementless Mobile Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasties: An Analysis of Data From the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic fractures are rare but serious complications of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Although cementless UKA has a lower risk of loosening than cemented, there are concerns that tibial fracture risk may be higher given the reliance on interference fit for primary stability. The risk of fracture and the effect of surgical fixation are currently unknown. We compared the periprosthetic fracture rate following cemented and cementless UKA surgery.

METHODS

A total of 14,122 medial mobile-bearing UKAs (7,061 cemented and 7,061 cementless) from the National Joint Registry and Hospital Episodes Statistics database were propensity score-matched. Cumulative fracture rates were calculated and Cox regressions were used to compare fixation groups.

RESULTS

The three-month periprosthetic fracture rates were similar (P = .80), being 0.10% in the cemented group and 0.11% in the cementless group. The fracture rates were highest during the first three months postoperatively, but then decreased and remained constant between one and 10 years after surgery. The one-year cumulative fracture rates were 0.2% (confidence interval [CI]: 0.1 to 0.3) for cemented and 0.2% (CI: 0.1 to 0.3) for cementless cases. The 10-year cumulative fracture rates were 0.8% (CI: 0.2 to 1.3) and 0.8% (CI: 0.3 to 1.3), respectively. The hazard ratio during the whole study period was 1.06 (CI: 0.64 to 1.77; P = .79).

CONCLUSIONS

The periprosthetic fracture rate following mobile bearing UKA surgery is low, being about 1% at 10 years. There were no significant differences in fracture rates between cemented and cementless implants after matching. We surmise that surgeons are aware of the higher theoretical risk of early fracture with cementless components and take care with tibial preparation.

LEVELS OF EVIDENCE

III.

Periprosthetic tibial fracture as a complication of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Current insights

Periprosthetic fracture following knee arthroplasty is a rare but devastating complication associated with significant morbidity. With unicompartmental knee arthroplasty being performed far less frequently than total knee arthroplasty, periprosthetic fracture following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty presents a particular challenge to orthopaedic surgeons, due to clinical unfamiliarity and sparsity of literature. An up-to-date review of the epidemiology, risk factors, and management strategies for PPF after UKA is presented.

Comparison of the early postoperative outcomes of cementless and cemented medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Aims

The primary objective of this registry-based study was to compare patient-reported outcomes of cementless and cemented medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) during the first postoperative year. The secondary objective was to assess one- and three-year implant survival of both fixation techniques.

Methods

We analyzed 10,862 cementless and 7,917 cemented UKA cases enrolled in the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry, operated between 2017 and 2021. Pre- to postoperative change in outcomes at six and 12 months' follow-up were compared using mixed model analyses. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models were applied to quantify differences in implant survival. Adjustments were made for patient-specific variables and annual hospital volume.

Results

Change from baseline in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and activity-related pain was comparable between groups. Adjustment for covariates demonstrated a minimally greater decrease in rest-related pain in the cemented group (β = -0.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.16 to -0.01)). Cementless fixation was associated with a higher probability of achieving an excellent OKS outcome (> 41 points) (adjusted odds ratio 1.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.3)). The likelihood of one-year implant survival was greater for cemented implants (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.35 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.71)), with higher revision rates for periprosthetic fractures of cementless implants. During two to three years' follow-up, the likelihood of implant survival was non-significantly greater for cementless UKA (adjusted HR 0.64 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.04)), primarily due to increased revision rates for tibial loosening of cemented implants.

Conclusion

Cementless and cemented medial UKA led to comparable improvement in physical function and pain reduction during the initial postoperative year, albeit with a greater likelihood of achieving excellent OKS outcomes after cementless UKA. Anticipated differences in early physical function and pain should not be a decisive factor in the choice of fixation technique. However, surgeons should consider the differences in short- and long-term implant survival when deciding which implant to use.

Risk and Epidemiology of Periprosthetic Knee Fractures After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Nationwide Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic knee fractures (PPKFs) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are uncommon, but potentially serious injuries. We analyze the risk and risk factors for a PPKF in standard primary TKA patients who have osteoarthritis and a minimally (cruciate-retaining TKAs without a femoral box cut) or posterior-stabilized TKA. In addition, we report the risk for patients who have other underlying knee disorders and/or a higher level of TKA constraint.

METHODS

All primary TKAs were identified from the Danish National Patient Register and the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Register using data between 1997 and 2022. Subsequent fractures were identified through the International Classification of Diseases diagnosis code, Nordic Medico-Statistical Committee procedure code, or indication for revision TKA.

RESULTS

We included 120,642 standard primary TKA patients who had 1,434 PPKFs. The cumulated proportions were 0.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3 to 0.4) at 2 years 0.8% (0.7 to 0.8) at 5 years. At 10 years, the cumulated proportion was 1.7% (1.6 to 1.8), with 1.3% in the femur, 0.2% in the patella, and 0.2% in the tibia. Significant risk factors were (hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI]); ipsilateral hip arthroplasty (2.3 [2.0 to 2.6]); women (2.1 [1.8 to 2.4]), osteoporosis (1.4 [1.2 to 1.7]); age 80+ (1.4 [1.3 to 1.6]), uncemented TKA (1.3 (1.1 to 1.5) and Charlson Comorbidity Index score 3+ (1.4 [1.1 to 1.8]). An additional 22,624 primary TKA patients who had other underlying knee disorders and/or a higher level of implant constraint were included with 485 PPKFs. The 10-year cumulated proportions were 8.3% (95% CI 6.9 to 9.8) when the underlying disorder was a previous fracture, 2.8% (2.2 to 3.5) for rheumatic disorders, and 5.2% (2.6 to 10.6) for osteonecrosis. In patients who had condylar constrained knees, it was 6.9% (5.1 to 9.4), and 12.4% (8.0 to 16.04) for hinges.

CONCLUSIONS

In standard primary TKA patients, the 10-year cumulated proportion of PPKFs was 1.7%, and ipsilateral hip arthroplasty, women, osteoporosis, advanced age, uncemented TKA and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index increased the risk. Higher risks were observed in non-osteoarthritis patients and/or patients who had a higher level of TKA constraint.

[Dealing with early complications in unicondylar knee arthroplasty-what works, what does not?]

Complications in the early postoperative period following the implantation of a unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) are both rare and rarely described in the literature. Often, only small case series or individual case reports are available. In this article, the most common complications of periprosthetic infection, periprosthetic tibial fracture, inlay dislocation and intra-articular cement residue in (loose bone cement body) are described and recommendations for conservative and surgical treatment are presented, including case examples. Ideally, surgical errors or an infection should be recognized at an early stage and revised as soon as possible.

[Successful medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-What are the most important surgical tricks?]

BACKGROUND

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is an established surgical treatment option for end-stage anteromedial osteoarthritis with excellent functional outcomes and implant survival. Routine preoperative varus and valgus stress views are crucial for the selection of patients for unicompartmental or total knee arthroplasty.

THERAPY

UKA is a soft-tissue based operation that aims to reconstruct the individual joint line and pre-arthritic alignment by restoring the physiological tension of the medial collateral and the cruciate ligaments.

RESULTS

Current data for medial UKA show excellent results for both mobile and fixed bearing implant designs with the correct indication and surgical technique. Cementless fixation offers potential advantages over cemented implants. Registry data demonstrate that institutions and surgeons specializing in partial knee replacement (> 30 cases/year per surgeon, > 100/year per institution) with a high percentage of UKA relative to the total number of knee implants (> 20%) have significantly lower revision rates.

Load transfer in bone after partial, multi-compartmental, and total knee arthroplasty

Introduction: Arthroplasty-associated bone loss remains a clinical problem: stiff metallic implants disrupt load transfer to bone and, hence, its remodeling stimulus. The aim of this research was to analyze how load transfer to bone is affected by different forms of knee arthroplasty: isolated partial knee arthroplasty (PKA), compartmental arthroplasty [combined partial knee arthroplasty (CPKA), two or more PKAs in the same knee], and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: An experimentally validated subject-specific finite element model was analyzed native and with medial unicondylar, lateral unicondylar, patellofemoral, bi-unicondylar, medial bicompartmental, lateral bicompartmental, tricompartmental, and total knee arthroplasty. Three load cases were simulated for each: gait, stair ascent, and sit-to-stand. Strain shielding and overstraining were calculated from the differences between the native and implanted states. Results: For gait, the TKA femoral component led to mean strain shielding (30%) more than three times higher than that of PKA (4%-7%) and CPKA (5%-8%). Overstraining was predicted in the proximal tibia (TKA 21%; PKA/CPKA 0%-6%). The variance in the distribution for TKA was an order of magnitude greater than for PKA/CPKA, indicating less physiological load transfer. Only the TKA-implanted femur was sensitive to the load case: for stair ascent and gait, almost the entire distal femur was strain-shielded, whereas during sit-to-stand, the posterior femoral condyles were overstrained. Discussion: TKA requires more bone resection than PKA and CPKA. These finite element analyses suggest that a longer-term benefit for bone is probable as partial and multi-compartmental knee procedures lead to more natural load transfer compared to TKA. High-flexion activity following TKA may be protective of posterior condyle bone resorption, which may help explain why bone loss affects some patients more than others. The male and female bone models used for this research are provided open access to facilitate future research elsewhere.

Undersizing of the tibial component in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) increases the risk of periprosthetic fractures

INTRODUCTION

Tibial periprosthetic fractures (TPF) after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are a rare condition that affects about 1% of cases. Known risk factors include age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and bone density, as well as surgical technique and prosthesis design. The purpose of the study was to determine if undersizing of the tibial component in relation to the femoral component increases the risk of tibial periprosthetic fractures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Over a 6-year-period 1542 patients with cemented (n = 363) and uncemented (n = 1179) medial UKA were retrospectively evaluated. Tibial periprosthetic fractures were identified and classified, and epidemiologic data were documented at follow-up. Undersizing was defined as a smaller tibial component compared to the femoral implant. The association of potential risk factors for TPF with the incidence of TPF was investigated with binominal logistic regression.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients (0.9%) suffered from TPF at a median of 1 month after surgery. The mean follow-up period was 5.9 ± 1.7 years. Fractures were more common in cases with undersized tibial components [odds ratio (OR) 3.2, p < 0.05]. Furthermore, older age (OR 1.1, p < 0.05) and female sex (OR 6.5, p < 0.05) were identified as significant risk factors, while BMI (p = 0.8) and cemented implantation (p = 0.2) had no effect on fracture rate. Revision surgery included open reduction and internal fixation or conversion to total knee arthroplasty.

CONCLUSIONS

Undersizing of implant sizes in UKA increases the risk for TPF especially in patients with small tibial implants. Therefore, mismatched implants should be avoided for UKA particularly when risk factors like obesity, older age, or female gender are present. Tibial periprosthetic fractures were successfully treated by open reduction and internal fixation or conversion to total knee arthroplasty.

A Comparison of the Periprosthetic Fracture Rate of Unicompartmental and Total Knee Replacements: An Analysis of Data of >100,000 Knee Replacements from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man and Hospital Episode Statistics

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic fractures are rare but devastating complications of knee replacement, often requiring complex surgery with substantial morbidity and mortality. It is not known how the fracture rates after total knee replacement (TKR) and unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) compare. We performed the first matched study comparing TKR and UKR periprosthetic fracture rates.

METHODS

This study involved 54,215 UKRs and 54,215 TKRs, identified in the National Joint Registry and Hospital Episodes Statistics database, which were propensity score-matched on patient and surgical factors. The International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, (ICD-10) code M96.6 was used to identify periprosthetic fractures at ≤3 and >3 months postoperatively, as well as estimate rates at up to 10 years. Subgroup analyses were performed in different age groups (<55, 55 to 64, 65 to 74, and ≥75 years), body mass index (BMI) categories (normal, 18.5 to <25 kg/m 2 ; overweight, 25 to <30 kg/m 2 ; obese, 30 to <40 kg/m 2 ; and morbidly obese, ≥40 kg/m 2 ), and sexes.

RESULTS

The 3-month fracture rate was 0.09% (n = 50) in the UKR group and 0.05% (n = 25) in the TKR group, with this difference being significant (odds ratio [OR], 2.0; p = 0.004). The rate of fractures occurring at >3 months was 0.32% (n = 171) in the UKR group and 0.61% (n = 329) in the TKR group (OR, 0.51; p < 0.001). At 10 years, the cumulative incidence of fractures was 0.6% after UKR versus 1% after TKR (OR, 0.68; p < 0.001). Fracture rates increased with increasing age, decreasing BMI, and female sex for both UKRs and TKRs.

CONCLUSIONS

The fracture risk was small after both UKR and TKR, with small absolute differences between implant types. During the first 3 postoperative months, the fracture rate after UKR was 0.1% and was about twice as high as that after TKR. However, over the first 10 years, the cumulative fracture rate after TKR was 1% and was almost twice as high as that after UKR. Fracture rates after both UKR and TKR were higher in women, patients ≥75 years of age, and patients with normal weight.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Does changes in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty practice pattern influence reasons for revision?

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe the pattern of revision indications for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and any change to this pattern for UKA patients over the last 20 years, and to investigate potential associations to changes in surgical practice over time.

Methods

All primary knee arthroplasty surgeries performed due to primary osteoarthritis and their revisions reported to the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Register from 1997 to 2017 were included. Complex surgeries were excluded. The data was linked to the National Patient Register and the Civil Registration System for comorbidity, mortality, and emigration status. TKAs were propensity score matched 4:1 to UKAs. Revision risks were compared using competing risk Cox proportional hazard regression with a shared γ frailty component.

Results

Aseptic loosening (loosening) was the most common revision indication for both UKA (26.7%) and TKA (29.5%). Pain and disease progression accounted for 54.6% of the remaining UKA revisions. Infections and instability accounted for 56.1% of the remaining TKA revision. The incidence of revision due to loosening or pain decreased over the last decade, being the second and third least common indications in 2017. There was a decrease associated with fixation method for pain (hazard ratio (HR) 0.40; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.94) and loosening (HR 0.29; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.81) for cementless compared to cemented, and units UKA usage for pain (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.91), and loosening (HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.70) for high usage.

Conclusion

The overall revision patterns for UKA and TKA for the last 20 years are comparable to previous published patterns. We found large changes to UKA revision patterns in the last decade, and with the current surgical practice, revision due to pain or loosening are significantly less likely.

Reduced 5-Year Risk for Revision of the Oxford UKA Using New Instrumentation versus Conventional Instrumentation: A Registry Study of 12,867 UKAs

Microplasty instrumentation was introduced for a more consistent surgical implantation technique, especially component alignment and tibial resection level, of the Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and thereby aims to improve UKA survival. This study aimed to assess the 5-year risk for revision and reasons for revision of the Oxford medial UKA using the new instrumentation (Microplasty) with its predecessor, that is, conventional instrumentation (Phase 3). Data of all medial UKAs from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (Landelijke Registratie Orthopedische Implantaten) between 2007 and 2019 were collected. Type of instrumentation was divided into new (Microplasty) and conventional instrumentation. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to calculate 5-year cumulative revision percentage with any reason for revision as end point. A multivariable Cox regression with outcome revision of UKA adjusted for age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, surgical history, and type of fixation was performed. Additionally, reasons for revision at 3-year were assessed and tested through Fisher's exact tests. A total of 12,867 Oxford medial UKAs, 8,170 using new and 4,697 using conventional instrumentation, were included. The 5-year revision percentage was 9.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.4-10.1%) for UKAs using the conventional and 6.1% (95% CI: 5.4-6.7%) for new instrumentation. The adjusted hazard ratio for revision at 5-year follow-up was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.63-0.87) in favor of UKAs using the new instrumentation. Malalignment was more frequently registered as reason for revision in UKAs using the conventional compared with the new instrumentation (16% versus 7.5%; p = 0.001). Our results show a reduced 5-year risk for revision of the medial Oxford UKAs using the new compared with the conventional instrumentation. This might be the result of a lower revision rate for malalignment in UKAs using the new instrumentation.

Cementless versus cemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of comparative studies

There are still some controversies regarding the clinical use of cementless UKAs. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether cementless medial UKA leads to similar outcomes compared to cemented medial UKA. This search was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines (PRISMA). The random effects model with 95% confidence interval (CI) was applied to the analysis. The I2 statistic was used to assess study heterogeneity. Six studies were eligible for inclusion (4784 UKAs, 4776 patients): 2947 cemented UKAs (61.6%) and 1837 cementless UKAs (38.4%). The overall mean follow-up was 4.9 years. The all-cause reoperation rate was 11.3% (80 of 706) at mean 5.7-year follow-up for cemented UKA and 6.9% (57 of 824) at mean 4.1-year follow-up for the cementless. The overall revision rate was 10.2% (303 of 2947) for the cemented and 5.8% (108 of 1837) for the cementless. Aseptic loosening was the most frequent reason of revision (2.3% cemented vs 0.5% cementless). The overall rate of radiolucent lines (RLL) was 28.3% (63 of 223) in the cemented cohort and 11.1% in the cementless (26 of 234). All the studies reported improved functional outcomes. Cementless UKA provides at least equivalent if not better results compared to cemented UKA. Despite the use of cemented UKA outnumber cementless fixation, available data shows that cementless UKA had a reduced midterm revision rate, while providing similar functional outcomes.

Did a New Design of the Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Prosthesis Result in Improved Survival? A Study From the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register 2012-2021

BACKGROUND

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has generally shown higher revision rates than TKA, and this is particularly true for the femoral component. A twin-peg femoral component (Oxford Partial) has replaced the single-peg version (Oxford Phase III) of the widely used Oxford medial UKA, with the aim of improving femoral component fixation. The introduction of the Oxford Partial Knee also included a fully uncemented option. However, there has been relatively little evidence regarding the effect of these changes on implant survival and revision diagnoses from groups not associated with the implant design.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Using data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, we asked: (1) Has the 5-year implant survival (free from revision for any cause) improved with the medial Oxford unicompartmental knee after the introduction of new designs? (2) Did the causes of revision change between the old and new designs? (3) Is there a difference in risk for specific revision causes between the uncemented and cemented versions of the new design?

METHODS

We performed a registry-based observational study using data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, a nationwide, mandatory and governmental registry with a high reporting rate. Between 2012 and 2021, 7549 Oxford UKAs were performed, and 105 were excluded due to combinations of the three designs, lateral compartment replacement, or hybrid fixation, leaving 908 cemented Oxford Phase III single-peg (used from 2012 to 2017), 4715 cemented Oxford Partial twin-peg (used from 2012 to 2021), and 1821 uncemented Oxford Partial twin-peg (used from 2014 to 2021), UKAs available for the analysis. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression multivariate analysis were used to find the 5-year implant survival and the risk of revision (hazard ratio), when adjusting for age, gender, diagnosis, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, and time period. The risk of revision for any cause and the risk of revision for specific causes were compared, first for the older with the two new designs, and second for the cemented with the uncemented version of the new design. Revision was defined as any operation exchanging or removing implant parts.

RESULTS

The 5-year Kaplan-Meier overall implant survival (free from revision for any cause) for the medial Oxford Partial unicompartmental knee did not improve over the study period. The 5-year Kaplan-Meier survival was different (p = 0.03) between the groups: it was 92% (95% confidence interval [CI] 90% to 94%) for the cemented Oxford III, 94% (95% CI 93% to 95%) for the cemented Oxford Partial, and 94% (95% CI 92% to 95%) for the uncemented Oxford Partial. However, the overall risk of revision during the first 5 years was not different between the groups (Cox regression HR 0.8 [95% CI 0.6 to 1.0]; p = 0.09 and 1.0 [95% CI 0.7 to 1.4]; p = 0.89 for the cemented Oxford Partial and the uncemented Oxford Partial, respectively, compared with cemented Oxford III [HR 1]). The uncemented Oxford Partial had a higher risk of revision for infection (HR 3.6 [95% CI 1.2 to 10.5]; p = 0.02) compared with the cemented Oxford III. The uncemented Oxford Partial had a lower risk of revision for pain (HR 0.5 [95% CI 0.2 to 1.0]; p = 0.045) and instability (HR 0.3 [95% CI 0.1 to 0.9]; p = 0.03) compared with the cemented Oxford III. The cemented Oxford Partial had a lower risk of revision for aseptic femoral loosening (HR 0.3 [95% CI 0.1 to 1.0]; p = 0.04) compared with the cemented Oxford III. When comparing the uncemented and cemented versions of the new design, the uncemented Oxford Partial had a higher risk of revision for periprosthetic fracture (HR 15 [95% CI 4 to 54]; p = 0.001) and infection within the first year (HR 3.0 [95% CI 1.5 to 5.7]; p = 0.001) than the cemented Oxford Partial.

CONCLUSION

Considering that we found no difference in overall risk of revision during the first 5 years but we found a higher risk of revision for infection, periprosthetic fracture, and higher per implant cost, we currently would recommend against the use of uncemented Oxford Partial over the cemented Oxford Partial or the cemented Oxford III.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Managing periprosthetic tibia fractures: International perspectives

Knee arthroplasty, both total knee and unicompartmental, has had a significant impact on millions of patients globally. Although satisfaction is usually high, complications such as periprosthetic fracture are increasingly common. Distal femur periprosthetic fractures are relatively well researched and understood in comparison with periprosthetic proximal tibia fractures (PTFs). The management of PTFs is essentially an evidence-free area. This review explores the literature (or lack thereof) and integrates cases from Australia and Japan. As it stands, there is scant literature relating to all facets of PTFs, including, most concerningly, the management of them. Larger studies are required to help further investigate this important interface between arthroplasty and orthopaedic trauma. As a guide, those with loose prostheses will likely benefit most from revision total knee arthroplasty, while those with well-fixed prostheses can be managad according to the fracture with homage paid to the presence of the prosthesis. The use of periarticular locked plates is likely a better option over conventional large or small fragment plates. Nonoperative management is a viable option for selected individuals and can be associated with favorable outcomes.

Safe and reliable clinical outcomes at 2 years of a fixed-bearing partial knee arthroplasty with a morphometric tibial tray in a large worldwide population

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate: (1) improvement of functional and quality of life scores, (2) adverse events, (3) short-term implants survivorship of a newly designed fixed-bearing partial knee replacement (PKR) with a morphometric tibial tray in a large and multicentric population at a minimum follow-up of 2 years.

METHODS

From 2017 to 2019, 479 medial PKR were implanted by 16 non-developing surgeons from United States, Europe, and Japan. Eight patients were lost to follow-up (1.8%). Standardized follow-up procedures included patient-reported outcomes (Oxford Knee Society score, Forgotten Joint Score, EQ VAS, EQ 5D), patient satisfaction, radiographic assessments, adverse event at 2 years. Comparisons between the preoperative and postoperative values were performed using Student t test. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed with knee revision as the endpoint.

RESULTS

The mean age was 65.6 ± 9.6 years. Mean body mass index was 29.5 ± 5.1 kg/m². Oxford Knee Society score and Forgotten Joint Score, respectively, improved from 23.7 ± 8 and 16 ± 15.8 preoperatively to 42.4 ± 6.5 and 74 ± 24.9 at 2 years (p < 0.0001). Satisfaction Score was 92.3 ± 13.4 at 2 years. Ten re-operations (2.1%) were reported including seven implant removals (1.5%). No other adverse event was reported. The causes of conversion to total knee arthroplasty were: nickel allergy (n = 2), patellofemoral osteoarthritis (n = 1), pain (n = 1), deep infection (n = 3). Two re-operations were performed due to infection, and one for internal fixation for a tibial plateau fracture. The 2-year Kaplan-Meier survival estimate was 98.4%, with implant removals as the endpoint.

CONCLUSION

This prospective multicentric study reported safe and reliable clinical outcomes of a morphometric PKR, which optimized tibial coverage and femoral fit, in a large population of patients worldwide at 2 years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prospective cohort study-therapeutic study, Level II.

Clinical and Functional Results of Cementless Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty with a Minimum Follow Up of 5 Years-A Consecutive Cohort of 201 Patients

The number of unicompartmental knee replacements (UKR) is increasing. Alongside various advantages, the revision rate of cemented UKR is higher compared to total knee arthroplasty (TKR). In contrast, cementless fixation shows reduced revision rates, compared to the cemented UKR. However, most of the recent literature is based on designer-dependent studies. In this retrospective, single-center cohort study, we investigated patients who underwent cementless Oxford UKR (OUKR) between 2012 and 2016 in our hospital with a minimum follow-up of five years. Clinical outcome was evaluated using the OKS, AKSS-O, AKSS-F, FFbH-OA, UCLA, SF-36, EQ-5D-3L, FJS, ROM, pain, and satisfaction measures. Survival analysis was performed with reoperation and revision as endpoints. We included 201 patients (216 knees) for clinical evaluation. All outcome parameters increased significantly from pre- to postoperative stages. The five-year survival rate was 96.1% for revision surgery and 94.9% for reoperation. The main reasons for revision were the progression of osteoarthritis, inlay dislocation, and tibial overstuffing. Two iatrogenic tibial fractures appeared. Cementless OUKR shows excellent clinical outcome and high survival rates after five years. The tibial plateau fracture in cementless UKR represents a serious complication and requires modification of the surgical technique.

Impact of keel saw blade design and thickness on the incidence of tibial plateau fracture and tibial implant-loosening in cementless medial UKR

BACKGROUND

Tibial plateau fractures and tibial implant- loosening are severe complications in cementless unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). The tibial keel preparation is particularly demanding and different saw blades can be used. It was hypothesized that different blade designs and thickness have an influence on the frequency of tibial plateau fractures and implant-loosening in cementless medial UKR.

METHODS

1258 patients with cementless medial UKR were included in this retrospective study between 2013 and 2020. The tibial keel cut was performed either with a double keel saw blade (DKS; 2.8 mm) and added hand guided pick or a mono reciprocating saw blade (RKB) of different thickness (2.5 mm; 2.65 mm; 2.75 mm). Tibial plateau fracture and loosening were demonstrated by standard two-plane radiographs. Tibial implant-loosening was defined as complete radiolucency and implant migration. Fracture and loosening were combined with pain and loss of function.

RESULTS

In 126 patients (10%) the tibial keel was prepared with DKS, in 407 patients (32.4%) with RKB 2.5 mm, in 330 patients (26.2%) with RKB 2.65 mm and in 395 patients (31.4%) with 2.75 mm. In 4 patients (3.17%) with DKS tibial plateau fracture occurred, in 4 patients (0.99%) with 2.5 mm RKB, in 3 patients (0.92%) with 2.65 mm RKB and in 1 patient (0.25%) with 2.75 mm RKB. Significantly fewer fractures occurred with a RKB design (p = 0.007). A negative correlation between fracture incidence and RKB saw blade thickness was found (Spearman-r = - 0.93). No difference for tibial implant-loosening was shown (p = 0.51).

CONCLUSION

Different blade designs and thickness have a significant influence on the incidence of tibial plateau fractures and aseptic tibial implant-loosening. The incidence of tibial plateau fractures in cementless medial UKR can be reduced by changing the design and thickness of the tibial keel saw blade. Greater thickness of RKB leads to significantly fewer tibial plateau fractures while the incidence of implant-loosening is not increasing.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was retrospectively registered and ethical approval was waived by the local ethical committee (No. 2020-1174).

Cementless unicompartmental knee arthroplasty results in higher pain levels compared to the cemented technique: a prospective register study

PURPOSE

In recent years, the preferred fixation method for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has changed from cemented to cementless. The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) from the cemented versus cementless techniques two- and twelve-months post-operation.

METHODS

From 2015 to 2019, 187 cemented and 261 cementless UKAs were included based on an institutional registry. The Oxford Unicompartmental Knee System™ (Zimmer Biomet, Bridgend, United Kingdom) was used for all patients. Three experienced surgeons performed all procedures. Data were collected pre- and peroperatively, and at two- and twelve-months postoperatively. PROMs included pain (evaluated on a numeric rating scale [NRS] during activity and at rest), and knee function (evaluated with the disease-specific short form of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS-PS]). Patients also rated postoperative joint function (better, unchanged, uncertain or worse) and were asked, "based on your experience to date, would you go through the surgery again?". Duration of surgery was noted and revisions during the first post-operative year were evaluated.

RESULTS

The cemented group reported significantly lower activity-related pain at both two- and twelve-month follow-up. This was also the case for pain at rest at twelve-month follow-up, and KOOS-PS at two-month follow-up. Duration of surgery (adjusted for surgeon differences) was eight minutes less on average with the cementless technique. Eleven prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) were found following the cementless fixation technique compared to three using the cemented implant.

CONCLUSION

UKA cases with cemented implants had lower pain scores during activity two and twelve months after surgery compared with those who had cementless implants. Differences in favor of the cemented group were also found for pain at rest one year after surgery and for KOOS-PS two months after. Surgery was significantly shorter in duration in the cementless group, but a relatively high number of PJIs were found in that same group.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.