A Comparison of Mobile and Fixed-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty at a Minimum 10-Year Follow-up

Safe bearing region for avoiding meniscal bearing impingement and overhang in mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

The purposes of this study were to propose a quantitative method of bearing overhang to minimize the effect of bearing spinning on mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (MB UKA), suggest and apply safe bearing regions in daily activities. The overhang distance and area were calculated for neutral and spinning positions. The safe bearing regions were based on the relationship between bearing overhang and linear wear rate. Eleven patients were included in an in-vivo experiment under dual fluoroscopic imaging following medial MB UKA. The bearing position was tracked by minimal joint space width, and the bearing overhang was calculated accordingly. Due to an equal contribution of 1 mm increase in medial overhang and 30 mm2 overhang areato wear rate, the maximum effect of potential bearing spinning on medial overhang distance was approximately three times as large as the overhang area. The safe bearing distance and area regions were rectangles and arches with different scales for different size combinations of bearing, femoral and tibial components. The maximum bearing overhang area during lunge (R = 0.76, p = 0.006) and open-chain exercise (R = 0.68, p = 0.02) significantly correlated with the overhang area in standing. The overhang area can be an appropriate parameter for evaluating dislocation degree less affected by potential bearing spinning than the overhang distance in clinical practice. The corresponding safe overhang area regions were proposed for surgical planning and postoperative dislocation degree evaluation. The bearing overhang area in static standing posture can be a valuable reference to estimate the dynamic overhang area and dislocation degree during motion.

Unicompartmental knee replacement: controversies and technical considerations

BACKGROUND

Unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) is one of the effective interventions for the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. Moreover, it has multiple advantages over total knee arthroplasty (TKA), including reduced intraoperative blood loss, decreased risk of transfusion, and faster recovery. This study aimed to discuss critical technical considerations regarding UKR and some of the controversies and updates.

METHODS

We conducted a review to provide an overview of the controversies and technical considerations about UKR in several aspects. Only peer-reviewed articles were included, up to December 2023 using PubMed, Google Scholar, ERIC, and Cochrane database for systematic reviews databases.

RESULT

UKR is associated with superior patient-reported clinical and functional outcomes, as well as shorter hospital stays, fewer postoperative complications, and revealed favorable outcomes in patients' return to sport. The choice between mobile- and fixed-bearing prostheses depends, in part, on the surgeon's preference. The mobile-bearing UKR is a less constrained prosthesis and can potentially result in less wear, but it is more technically demanding. While no significant difference between mobile-bearing versus fixed-bearing prostheses, cementless is superior to cemented design. Furthermore, UKR can be a good alternative for high tibial osteotomy (HTO) and still can be considered after a failed HTO. Lastly, recent reviews have shown a revision rate comparable to that of TKA. This is probably influenced by Improved comprehension of the best indications, patient selection criteria, as well as of the design, materials, and technological advances.

CONCLUSION

UKR treatment for unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis is secure and effective. Based on clinical and functional outcomes, decreased morbidity and mortality, and cost-effectiveness, long-term studies suggest that UKR is superior to TKA. Further investigation in this area is warranted.

The Femur-First Technique for Oxford Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Background

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a reliable procedure to treat medial compartment knee osteoarthritis (OA). The reported survivorship of UKA has varied in the literature3-7. In part, the higher failure rates of UKA seen in registries could be related to the caseload and experience of the reporting surgeon8. The introduction of techniques that make procedures more reliable, especially in the hands of inexperienced surgeons, can decrease the rate of failure. With the Oxford UKA implant (Zimmer Biomet), the recommended surgical technique involves cutting the tibia first, followed by the femoral preparation. However, a technique that allows for preparation of the femur first, as well as the use of the femoral component as a reference for the tibial cut, may reduce the common technical errors seen with the procedure. We have utilized the femur-first technique in cases of medial Oxford UKA.

Description

The femur-first method outlined in the present article does not require any unique instruments beyond what is supplied by the manufacturer. Before beginning, the femoral positional guide needs to be decoupled from its base. To start, the intramedullary guide is introduced approximately 1 cm anterior and medial to the intercondylar notch. Once the femoral osteophytes are removed, the surgeon identifies the center of the femoral condyle and marks it. The posterior tibial cartilage is then removed with a saw to facilitate the placement of the appropriately sized femoral spherical guide. The size of the femoral component is determined by selecting the implant that aligns best with the width of the femoral condyle. The femoral drill guide is detached from its base because there is not enough space for the base, as the tibia has not yet been resected. The decoupled femoral guide is connected to the intramedullary rod, allowing the precise positioning of the femoral component in approximately 10° of flexion relative to the femoral sagittal plane and drilling of the 2 peg holes. The posterior condylar resection guide is impacted into position, and the osteotomy of the posterior condyle is made. The distal femur is then milled with use of a number-0 spigot, and the femoral component trial is positioned into place. The femoral condyle is "resurfaced" with the femoral component, which restores joint obliquity and the natural height, a critical element of the femur-first technique. Following this, the 1-mm (size-dependent) spherical gauge is placed around the femoral component trial. The tibial guide is secured with the G-clamp and a number-0 resection block, and is pinned into place. We recommend swapping the number-0 cutting guide for a +2 when making the cut in order to avoid over-resection. Recutting is advised if a minimum 3-mm feeler gauge does not adequately occupy the flexion space. The final step is to balance the flexion and extension gaps in the usual fashion.

Alternatives

The alternative technique is a traditional tibia-first approach, in which tibial resection is performed prior to femoral resection. As described in the original manufacturer's manual, the tibial cut is accomplished with use of a number-0 cutting guide, and the tibial rotation is based on the axis formed by the anterior superior iliac spine and knee center, irrespective of the femoral condyle.

Rationale

The femur-first technique is advantageous in several ways. When performing the femoral cut first, the surgeon can better align the drill guide at the center of medial femoral condyle. This will result in the femoral component being positioned more in line with the coronal plane of the femoral condyle. Additionally, the tibial resection is made with the femoral trial in place; therefore, the depth of resection can be more accurate, potentially avoiding excessive bone resection. Finally, with the femoral trial in place, the surgeon can judge the rotation and medial-lateral position of the tibial component more precisely, hence lowering the possibility of bearing spin-out, impingement, and dislocation or unexplained pain.

Expected Outcomes

The femur-first technique is a bone-preserving procedure that results in thinner bearings when compared with a tibia-first approach1. The femur-first approach also improves radiographic outcomes, including femoral coronal, femoral sagittal, and tibial sagittal alignments, while tibial coronal alignment does not differ. There is an early trend toward improved 5-year survivorship with the femur-first (98%) versus tibia-first (94%, p = 0.35) techniques. There has been no significant difference reported in Knee Society Scores between techniques.

Important Tips

Perform a preliminary cut of the posterior tibial cartilage in order to allow insertion of the femoral drill guide under the femoral condyle.Make sure the femoral drill guide lies in the center of the marked medial femoral condyle.Align the tibial sagittal cut with the femoral component trial in order to avoid bearing impingement.Be conservative in the tibial cutting by utilizing a +2 cutting guide (since the coupling is performed with the intramedullary guide in place, which drives the tibial guide distally).

Acronyms and Abbreviations

UKA = unicompartmental knee arthroplastyFF = femur-firstM-L = medial-lateralAP = anteroposteriorPA = posteroanteriorASA = acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin)BID = bis in die, twice a dayPT = physical therapyTF = tibia-firstFCA = femoral coronal angleFSA = femoral sagittal angleTSA = tibial sagittal angleIM = intramedullaryOA = osteoarthritis.

Regional Trends in Unicondylar and Patellofemoral Knee Arthroplasty: An Analysis of the American Joint Replacement Registry

BACKGROUND

As the popularity of unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) and patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) have expanded, more patients who have limited arthritis are undergoing partial knee arthroplasty. No studies have evaluated if any regional differences in the United States (U.S.) exist between partial versus total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to utilize the American Joint Replacement Registry to evaluate regional differences in UKA, PFA, and TKA.

METHODS

The American Joint Replacement Registry was queried for all TKA, PFA, and UKA procedures between 2012 and 2021. Surgical volume was compared between the Midwest (MW), Northeast (NE), South, and West (W) regions. Trends were compared using multivariate logistic regression analyses and least squared mean logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Since 2012, there has been a steady increase in the amount of UKAs performed across the U.S., except during the COVID-19 pandemic when numbers decreased. Logistic regression analyses demonstrated a higher likelihood of receiving a UKA compared to TKA in the NE compared to other regions, and higher likelihood of receiving a PFA in the NE and W compared to other regions over the study period. Other factors that increased the likelihood of having a UKA nationally were men, the procedure being performed at a teaching hospital, and having surgery in urban areas. Patients were more likely to have a PFA in the NE compared to the S and MW, and higher odds in the South and W compared to the MW, with rates of PFA consistently lower in the MW compared to other regions.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients were more likely to have a UKA in the NE compared to other regions of the country. Patients had higher odds of having a PFA in the NE and W regions relative to the MW. Men had higher odds of having either UKA or PFA than women across the nation.

Application strategy of finite element analysis in artificial knee arthroplasty

Artificial knee arthroplasty, as the most effective method for the treatment of end-stage joint diseases such as knee osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, is widely used in the field of joint surgery. At present, Finite element analysis (FEA) has been widely used in artificial knee replacement biomechanical research. This review presents the current hotspots for the application of FEA in the field of artificial knee replacement by reviewing the existing research literature and, by comparison, summarizes guidance and recommendations for artificial knee replacement surgery. We believe that lower contact stress can produce less wear and complications when components move against each other, in the process of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), mobile-bearing prostheses reduce the contact surface stress of the tibial-femoral joint compared with fixed-bearing prostheses, thus reducing the wear of the polyethylene insert. Compared with mechanical alignment, kinematic alignment reduces the maximum stress and maximum strain of the femoral component and polyethylene insert in TKA, and the lower stress reduces the wear of the joint contact surface and prolongs the life of the prosthesis. In the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), the femoral and tibial components of mobile-bearing prostheses have better conformity, which can reduce the wear of the components, while local stress concentration caused by excessive overconformity of fixed-bearing prostheses should be avoided in UKA to prevent accelerated wear of the components, the mobile-bearing prosthesis maintained in the coronal position from 4° varus to 4° valgus and the fixed-bearing prosthesis implanted in the neutral position (0°) are recommended. In revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKA), the stem implant design should maintain the best balance between preserving bone and reducing stress around the prosthesis after implantation. Compared with cemented stems, cementless press-fit femoral stems show higher fretting, for tibial plateau bone defects, porous metal blocks are more effective in stress dispersion. Finally, compared with traditional mechanical research methods, FEA methods can yield relatively accurate simulations, which could compensate for the deficiencies of traditional mechanics in knee joint research. Thus, FEA has great potential for applications in the field of medicine.

The patient acceptable symptom state for the knee society score, oxford knee score and short form-36 following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

The patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) is a target value on a patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) scale beyond which patients deem themselves to have attained an acceptable outcome. This study aimed to define the PASS thresholds for generic and knee-specific PROMs at 2 years after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA).

METHODS

Prospectively collected data of 955 patients who underwent UKA for medial osteoarthritis at a single institution was reviewed. Patients were assessed preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively using the Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS), Function Score (KSFS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), SF-36 Physical Component Score (PCS) and Mental Component Score (MCS). Responses to an anchor question assessing patients' overall rating of treatment results were dichotomized and used to determine if PASS was achieved. PASS thresholds for each PROM were selected based on the Youden index on a receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve. Sensitivity analyses were performed for different subgroups (by age, gender, BMI), baseline score tertiles and an alternate definition of PASS.

RESULTS

In total, 92.7% reported their current state as acceptable. The areas under the curve (AUC) for ROCs were 0.72-0.83, except for the SF-36 PCS (AUC 0.64), indicating good discriminative accuracy of the other PROMs. PASS thresholds were 85.5 for KSKS, 77.5 for KSFS, 41.5 for OKS, 49.9 for SF-36 PCS and 54.6 for SF-36 MCS. Sensitivity analyses revealed that the thresholds were robust. Patients who attained a PASS were at least 4-5 times more likely to be satisfied and have expectations fulfilled.

CONCLUSION

PASS thresholds can be used to define treatment success in future outcome studies. At the individual level, they provide clinically relevant benchmarks for surgeons when assessing postoperative recovery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients under the age of 60 years provides excellent clinical outcomes and 10-year implant survival: a systematic review : A study performed by the Early Osteoarthritis group of ESSKA-European Knee Associates section

PURPOSE

The purpose of the present study was to systematically review the clinical and functional outcomes following medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) in patients under the age of 60 years old.

METHODS

Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, studies between 2012 and April 2022, on patients 18-60 years old who have had a unicompartmental knee replacement evaluating patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs), were included. The Knee Society Scores (KSS) clinical score was considered the primary outcome. Pre- and post-operative range of motion (ROM), PROMs, complications and survival were recorded. Paired sample t testing was performed to compare the pre-operative with post-operative KSS.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles comprising 2083 unicompartmental arthroplasties were included. The follow-up range was between 1 and 15 years. In eligible studies, all reported outcomes were improved following UKA. The mean KSS clinical was significantly improved from 45.5 (SD: 9.6) pre-operatively to 89.4 (SD: 4.4) post-operatively (p = 0.0001). Mean implant survival ranged 86-96.5% at 10 years follow-up. There was no significant difference between mobile and fixed bearing in terms of ROM and KSS clinical. In total, 92 revisions and 7 re-operations with implant retention were reported.

CONCLUSION

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for medial osteoarthritis is a safe, reliable and effective treatment option for patients of 60 years or younger. It provides pain relief, satisfactory activity level, excellent clinical outcomes, and up to 96.5% implant survival at 10-year follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Femur-First Technique for Mobile Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Results in Decreased Implant Variability and Early Improvements in Function and Survivorship

BACKGROUND

Higher failure rates of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are seen with lower surgical volume. Surgical techniques that introduce less variability improving implant positioning may lead to improved survivorship. A femur-first (FF) technique has been described, but survivorship data compared to traditional tibia-first (TF) technique are under-reported. We report the results of mobile-bearing UKA using the FF technique compared to the TF technique with emphasis on implant position and survivorship.

METHODS

A total of 430 UKAs were performed by a single surgeon between 2007 and 2020. After 2012, there were 141 consecutive UKAs performed with the FF technique which were compared with 147 consecutive UKAs prior. Mean follow-up was 6 years (range, 2 to 13 years), average age was 63 years (range, 23 to 92 years), and there were 132 women. Postoperative radiographs were reviewed to determine implant positioning. Survivorship analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier curves.

RESULTS

The FF resulted in significantly thinner polyethylene (3.4 ± 0.7 mm versus 3.7 ± 0.9 mm) (P = .002) and 4 mm or less bearing thickness in 94% of cases. At 5 years, there was an early trend toward improved survivorship free from component revision (98% for the FF group and 94% for the TF [P = .35]). The FF cohort had higher Knee Society Functional scores at final follow-up (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Compared to traditional TF technique, the FF was more bone-preserving and improved radiographic positioning. The FF technique is an alternative method for mobile-bearing UKA and was associated with an improvement in implant survivorship and function.

Physical Activity of Young Patients following Minimally Invasive Lateral Unicompartmental Knee Replacement

Unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) has increased in popularity in recent years, especially in young patients with high demands on their athletic ability. To date, there are no data available on the physical activity of young patients following lateral UKR. The aim of this study was to demonstrate return-to-activity rate and sporting activity of patients aged 60 years or younger following lateral UKR with a fixed-bearing (FB) prosthesis. Thirty-seven patients aged 60 years or younger after lateral FB-UKR were included. Sporting activities were assessed using the University of California Los Angeles activity scale (UCLA) and the Tegner activity score (TAS). Clinical outcome was measured using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), range of motion (ROM) and visual analogue scale (VAS). The mean follow-up (FU) was 3.1 ± 1.5 years and the mean age at surgery was 52.8 ± 3.1 years. The return-to-activity rate was 87.5% and 49% of patients were highly active postoperatively as defined by an UCLA score of 7 or higher. All clinical parameters increased significantly postoperatively. We demonstrated a high return-to-activity rate with nearly half of the patients achieving high activity levels. Longer FU periods are necessary to evaluate the effect of activity on implant survival.

Mobile bearing versus fixed bearing medial unicompartmental knee replacement: an independent two center matched-pairs analysis

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the present study was to compare clinical outcome between patients following fixed-bearing (FB) or mobile-bearing (MB) unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) for antero-medial knee osteoarthrosis (OA) at two independent orthopedic centers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Matched-pairs were built between 35 patients receiving FB-UKR and 52 patients following MB-UKR regarding age at time of surgery, body mass index (BMI) and range of motion (ROM) preoperatively. Clinical and functional outcome was measured postoperatively by the American Knee Society Score (AKSS-O/AKSS-F), ROM, Tegner Activity Scale (TAS) as well as the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36).

RESULTS

The average treatment effect of the treated (ATT) after propensity score matching showed a significantly superior ROM in patients following MB-UKR (FB: 118°, MB: 124°). All remaining parameters had no statistically significant differences between both groups involving TAS, AKSS and SF-36.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that MB-UKR can provide a greater ROM compared to FB-UKR on comparable patients. The authors believe that both designs are suitable for adequate improvement of clinical outcome and ROM for patients suffering from antero-medial osteoarthrosis of the knee joint.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective cohort study, Level IV.

Predictors of a forgotten joint after medial fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

A forgotten joint is considered the ultimate goal of joint replacement. We aim to explore the predictive factors of a forgotten joint after fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used prospectively collected data from 302 cases of medial-compartment UKA with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. The primary outcome was the achievement of a forgotten joint after UKA, according to the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12) at the last follow-up. Patients with FJS-12 > 84 were considered to have forgotten UKA. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted with preoperative patient characteristics and surgery-related factors as potential predictors.

RESULTS

Of patients, 94 (31.1%) achieved a forgotten joint post-surgery. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that preoperative hip-knee-ankle angle (HKAA), anatomic lateral distal femoral angle (aLDFA), and postoperative HKAA and HKAA changes were independent predictors of a forgotten joint. The probability of achieving a forgotten joint increased by 29% (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.12-1.51) with a 1° increase in aLDFA. Preoperative HKAA, postoperative HKAA, HKAA changes (ΔHKAA), and outcomes exhibited a non-linear relationship. The probability of achieving a forgotten joint was the highest with preoperative HKAA > 172.0°, postoperative HKAA of 176.0-178.5°, and ΔHKAA < 5.5°.

CONCLUSION

To achieve the forgotten joint state, the ideal HKAA range after medial fixed-bearing UKA is 176.0-178.5° and ΔHKAA should be <5.5°. Patients with smaller preoperative aLDFA and HKAA have a lower probability of achieving a forgotten joint after UKA.

A well performing medial fixed bearing UKA with promising survivorship at 15 years

BACKGROUND

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) accounts for 10% of knee arthroplasty procedures in Europe. Fixed bearing UKA designs have shown favorable survivorship in registries when compared with mobile bearings. This study analyses long-term follow-up of patients with a medial fixed bearing metal backed tibial UKA and reports 15 years survivorship and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Data were collected prospectively for 148 medial unicompartmental fixed bearing metal backed UKAs implanted in 148 patients in two high volumes knee arthroplasty centers between January 2005 and December 2007. The indication was osteoarthritis in all but 2 patients. Patients' reported outcome scores were documented at last follow up. The mean patient age at time of surgery was 65 years.

RESULTS

At final follow up, outcome and survivorship data were collected for 124 medial fixed bearing UKAs. Thirteen patients underwent revision; average time to revision was 77 months (SD 35.31). The Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a survivorship of 97.65% at 69 months and of 89,52%. at 120 months and 173 months of follow-up. When revisions for infection were excluded, the survivorship of the implant was 90.3% at the last of follow up. The mean OKS was 43.02 (SD 5.1) at the last follow-up, and the mean FJS was 77.6 (SD 6.9).

CONCLUSION

This Medial fixed bearing metal backed UKA demonstrates promising long-term survivorship and patient outcomes. It appears to be a suitable and reasonably lasting option for the treatment of medial compartment OA.

Minimum 10-Year Survivorship of Mobile-Bearing Unicompartmental Arthroplasty: Single Surgeon, North American Non-Designer Consecutive Series

BACKGROUND

Mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) provides a durable option for the surgical treatment of monocompartmental knee arthritis. Despite its availability in the United States since 2004, there is only 1 published North American series reporting on the minimum 10-year results of mobile-bearing UKA. The purpose of this study is to determine the survivorship, reasons for failure, and patient-reported outcomes of the Oxford mobile-bearing UKA at minimum 10-year follow-up.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-seven knees were eligible for inclusion in this study based on the date of their index surgery allowing for a minimum 10-year follow-up. The mean follow-up from implantation was 11.4 years (range 10.0-13.8). Failures were reviewed for potential etiologic factors. Survivorship free of reoperation for any reason and free of revision was determined using Kaplan-Meier curves. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Knee Society Knee and Function scores.

RESULTS

There were 17 revisions (10.6%). Six were secondary to progression of lateral compartment arthritis, 5 for persistent pain, 3 for femoral component aseptic loosening, 2 polyethylene dislocations, and 1 deep infection. The mean time to revision was 4 years (range 0.1-11). The survivorship free from revision at minimum 10-year follow-up was 85%. At final follow-up, the mean Knee Society Knee Score was 93 (range 66-100) and the mean functional score was 80 (range 30-100).

CONCLUSION

This single surgeon series demonstrated a survivorship of 85% at minimum 10-year follow-up. These results are comparable to published data from North America, but survivorship is lower than European series.

Mobile Bearing versus Fixed Bearing for Unicompartmental Arthroplasty in Monocompartmental Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Whether mobile-bearing (MB) unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) performs better than fixed-bearing (FB) implants in patients with monocompartmental osteoarthritis (OA) still remains unclear. Therefore, a meta-analysis comparing MB versus FB for UKA was conducted to investigate the possible advantages of MB versus FB in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), range of motion (ROM), and complications. We hypothesised that the MB design performs better than FB. Methods: This systematic review was conducted according to the 2020 PRISMA guidelines. In December 2021, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase were accessed, with no time constraints. All the clinical investigations comparing MB versus FB bearing for UKA were accessed. Only studies published in peer-reviewed journals were considered. Studies reporting data on revision settings were excluded, as were those combining unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty. Results: Data from 25 studies (4696 patients) were collected; 58% (2724 of 4696 patients) were women. The mean length of follow-up was 45.8 ± 43.2. The mean age of the patients was 65.0 ± 5.6 years. No difference was found in range of motion (p = 0.05), Knee Scoring System (p = 0.9), function subscale (p = 0.2), and Oxford Knee Score (p = 0.4). No difference was found in the rate of revision (p = 0.2), aseptic loosening (p = 0.9), deep infections (p = 0.99), fractures (p = 0.6), and further extension of OA to the contralateral joint compartment (p = 0.2). Conclusion: The present meta-analysis failed to identify the possible superiority of the MB implants over the FB for UKA in patients with monocompartmental knee osteoarthritis. Long observational investigations are required to evaluate possible long-term complications and implant survivorship. These results should be interpreted within the limitations of the present study.

Association of alignment variables, posteromedial tibial cartilage wear and anterior cruciate ligament insufficiency in participants with varus knee osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and unicompartment knee arthroplasty (UKA) are among the most important treatment options for end-stage knee osteoarthritis. Previous papers have noted the importance of knowing the type of medial tibial wear in deciding to manage varus knee osteoarthritis patients with TKA vs UKA. But few studies have delineated the pre-operative variables predicting the type of tibia wear.

METHODS

This study assessed individuals with varus knee osteoarthritis planned for knee arthroplasty. After recording the demographic variables, hip-knee-ankle joint alignment views were taken from all patients. Finally, the type of tibial wear encountered during the surgery (posteromedial, non-posteromedial) was documented.

RESULTS

A total of 325 knees and 301 participants were evaluated in the study. Participants aged 67.12 (± SD 8.14) and the male to female ratio was 0.20. Between either non-posteromedial/posteromedial wear or insufficient/sufficient ACL cases, there was a statistically significant difference with regard to MPTA, LDFA, VA, and JCA (P value < 0.05). Sixty-three percent of knees had non-posteromedial wear in the tibia plateau and 37% had posteromedial wear. Posteromedial wear was associated with 95% chance of ACL tear. Non-posteromedial knee had nearly 50% chance of having ACL insufficiency. Among non-posteromedial cases, VA of 14.5 as cut-off value had 65% sensitivity, 90% specificity, 73% negative predictive value, 87% positive predictive value, and 78% accuracy in detecting ACL insufficiency.

CONCLUSION

Posteromedial tibial wear is associated with ACL insufficiency. However, regarding non-posteromedial cases, varus angle > 14.5 is highly predictive of ACL tear (87% positive predictive value).

St Georg Sled medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: survivorship analysis and function at 20 years follow up

PURPOSE

The peri-operative and short-term benefits of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are well supported in the literature. However, there remains concern regarding the higher revision rate when compared with total knee replacement. This manuscript reports the functional outcome and survivorship of a large series of fixed bearing, medial unicompartmental replacements (St Georg Sled), with a minimum of 20 years follow-up.

METHODS

Between 1974 and 1994, 399 patients (496 knees) underwent a medial fixed-bearing UKA. Prospective data were collected pre-operatively and at regular intervals post-operatively using the Bristol Knee Score (BKS), Oxford Knee (OKS) and Western Ontario MacMaster (WOMAC) scores. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to determine survivorship, with revision or need for revision as end point, and differences assessed using Mantel-Cox log rank test.

RESULTS

Functional knee scores improved post-operatively, but demonstrated a slight decline from 10 years of follow-up onwards. Survivorship is estimated as 86% at 10 years, 80% at 15 years, and 78% at 20 years. Sixty knees were revised, with progression of disease in another compartment the commonest reason. Eighty eight percent were revised using a primary prosthesis. For patients over the age of 65 years at the time of index procedure, 93% died with a functioning prosthesis in situ.

CONCLUSION

Medial UKA demonstrates good long-term function and survivorship, and represents an excellent surgical option for patients aged over 65 years of age, where few patients will require a revision procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Bone-on-Bone Contact on Radiograph is not a Prerequisite for Successful Outcome in Fixed-Bearing Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty-A 10-Year Follow-Up Study

INTRODUCTION

 Patients without bone-on-bone osteoarthritis are excluded from mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty due to higher revision rates and poorer outcomes. However, we do not know if the same indication applies to fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty implants. Our study aims to compare functional outcomes and revision rates in patients with and without bone-on-bone arthritis undergoing fixed-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 We reviewed 153 fixed-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasties in a single institution. Patients were divided into four groups based on joint space remaining measured on preoperative radiographs. Group 1 included knees with bone-on-bone contact; group 2 included knees with less than 2 mm joint space; group 3 included knees with 2 to 4 mm joint space; group 4 included knees with more than 4 mm joint space. Patients were followed up for 10 years postoperatively and assessed using the Oxford Knee Score, the Functional Score and Knee Score from the Knee Society Clinical Rating Score, and the Short Form 36 Health Survey.

RESULTS

 There was no difference in terms of demographic data and preoperative scores. Postoperative Knee Society Functional Score was found to be lower in group 1 as compared with the other groups. There was no difference between the four groups of patients in terms of Knee Society Knee Score, Oxford Knee Score, and Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary Scores from the Short Form 36 Health Survey. There was no difference in terms of survivorship free from all-cause revision at a minimum of 10 years' follow-up.

CONCLUSION

 Symptomatic patients with varying degrees of arthritis on preoperative radiographs had comparable clinical outcomes. We conclude that symptomatic patients with clinical and radiographic evidence of medial compartment osteoarthritis of any grade can benefit from a fixed-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Knee Scores of Patients with Non-Lateral Compartmental Knee Osteoarthritis Undergoing Mobile, Fixed-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee and Total Knee Arthroplasties: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective

To evaluate knee scores and clinical efficacies of patients with non‐lateral unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (OA) who randomly underwent mobile‐bearing (MB) unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), fixed‐bearing (FB) UKA, and total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Methods

From September 2015 to February 2017, a prospective, randomized, parallel, single‐center trial of 180 patients (78 males and 102 females; 63.3 ± 6.9 years) with non‐lateral compartmental knee OA was performed in the first author‐affiliated hospital. The patients were randomly divided into three groups (each group included 60 patients) and received medial cemented Oxford phase 3 MB UKA, medial cemented Link FB UKA, or cemented DePuy Sigma PFC TKA, respectively. A similar perioperative management and fast‐track surgery program was carried out for all patients. The knee scores at 3‐year follow‐up after operation and clinical efficacies of these three groups of patients were recorded, investigated, and compared.

Results

Primarily, compared to the TKA group, the UKA groups (MB UKA and FB UKA) had shorter operative time (median 63.2 < 67.1 min), less bleeding (8.6 < 30.0 mL), earlier resumption of walking without crutches (3.0 < 8.0 days) and walking up and down the stairs (5.0 < 10.0 days) (P < 0.001), higher FJS scores (78.0 > 74.5) (P = 0.007), better results in all knee scores (except VAS and KSS function scores) (P < 0.05), and a larger maximum flexion angle of the knee at the 3‐year follow‐up (123.0° > 96.0°) (P = 0.001). Secondarily, compared to the TKA group, the MB UKA group showed better results in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities index (WOMAC) stiffness (83.6 > 79.6), WOMAC total (86.3 > 83.2), Oxford knee score (OKS) (20.0 < 23.0), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) (78.5 > 74.5), and a larger maximum flexion angle of the knee (123.0 > 96.0) (P < 0.05). Moreover, the FB UKA group showed higher Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Score (HSS) (91.0 > 88.5), WOMAC stiffness (84.3 > 79.6), WOMAC function (85.2 > 81.7), WOMAC total scores (87.6 > 83.2), and a larger maximum flexion angle of the knee (119.0° > 96.0°) than the TKA group (P < 0.05). Overall, there was no significant difference in all knee scores and maximum flexion angles of the knee for the MB UKA and FB UKA groups (P > 0.05). There was one case with original bearing dislocation in MB UKA group. One patient with displacement of the femoral component caused by a fall injury, and another patient, who lost his life in a car accident, were involved in the FB UKA group. There was an infection case and an intermuscular vein thrombosis case in TKA group.

Conclusion

UKA showed more advantages than TKA; however, there was no significant difference between the MB UKA and FB UKA groups for treatment of non‐lateral compartmental knee OA.

Excellent outcomes with Oxford Uni-compartmental knee arthroplasty in anteromedial osteoarthritis patients (≤60 years) at mid-term follow-up

Background

The use of Oxford uni-compartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has rapidly increased worldwide,however,the relevance of younger patients for postoperative function after Oxford UKA remains unclear. The main purpose of our study is to clarify the effectivemess of Oxford UKA in the younger Chinese patients with anteromedial osteoarthritis (AMOA).

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled 252 consecutive patients who underwent Oxford UKA for AMOA with a minimum follow-up of 5 years between March 2013 and December 2016. The patients were divided into the younger (≤60 years) and elderly (> 60 years) age groups. The demographic data and surgery variables were recorded and compared. Patient satisfaction grade, range of motion (ROM), Oxford knee score (OKS), Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) Universities Osteoarthritis Index score and postoperative complications were recorded. The 5-year survival of the implants were also compared with TKA revision as the endpoint.

Results

A total of 252 consecutive patients were recruited, including 96 aged 60 years or less and 156 aged over 60 years. The mean follow-up duration in the younger and elderly groups were 73.6 months (SD,standard deviation, 4.1) and 74.7 months (SD 6.2) respectively. Patient satisfaction rate was high in both groups (P = 0.805). Furthermore, no significant differences were observed in postoperative ROM(P = 0.299), OKS(P = 0.117), HSS(P = 0.357) and WOMAC scores(P = 0.151) between the younger and elderly groups (P>0.05). However, the incidence of joint stiffness (P = 0.033) and delayed wound dehiscence (P = 0.026) were significantly different between both groups. Five-year implant survival without revision were also similar in both groups (96.9% vs 97.4%, P = 0.871), and that for the entire cohort was 97.2% (95% CI 95.4–99.6).

Conclusion

Oxford UKA for AMOA demonstrated favorable results in younger patients aged ≤60 years at a minimum 5-year follow-up in terms of patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, implant survival and postoperative complications. Therefore, younger patients might not be considered as an absolute contraindication to Oxford UKA.

Cementless unicompartmental knee replacement achieves better ten-year clinical outcomes than cemented: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to report and compare the long-term revision rate, revision indications and patient reported outcome measures of cemented and cementless unicompartmental knee replacements (UKR).

METHODS

Databases Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central of Controlled Trials were searched to identify all UKR studies reporting the ≥ 10 year clinical outcomes. Revision rates per 100 component years [% per annum (% pa)] were calculated by fixation type and then, subgroup analyses for fixed and mobile bearing UKRs were performed. Mechanisms of failure and patient reported outcome measures are reported.

RESULTS

25 studies were eligible for inclusion with a total of 10,736 UKRs, in which there were 8790 cemented and 1946 cementless knee replacements. The revision rate was 0.73% pa (CI 0.66-0.80) and 0.45% pa (CI 0.34-0.58) per 100 component years, respectively, with the cementless having a significantly (p < 0.001) lower overall revision rate. Therefore, based on these studies, the expected 10-year survival of cementless UKR would be 95.5% and cemented 92.7%. Subgroup analysis revealed this difference remained significant for the Oxford UKR (0.37% pa vs 0.77% pa, p < 0.001), but for non-Oxford UKRs there were no significant differences in revision rates of cemented and cementless UKRs (0.57% pa vs 0.69% pa, p = 0.41). Mobile bearing UKRs had significantly lower revision rates than fixed bearing UKRs in cementless (p = 0.001), but not cemented groups (p = 0.13). Overall the revision rates for aseptic loosening and disease progression were significantly lower (p = 0.02 and p = 0.009 respectively) in the cementless group compared to the cemented group (0.06 vs 0.13% pa and 0.10 vs 0.21% pa respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Cementless fixation had reduced long-term revision rates compared to cemented for the Oxford UKR. For the non-Oxford UKRs, the revision rates of cementless and cemented fixation types were equivalent. Therefore, cementless UKRs offer at least equivalent if not lower revision rates compared to cemented UKRs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Patient-acceptable symptom state for reporting outcomes following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty : a matched pair analysis comparing UKA in ACL-deficient versus ACL-intact knees

AIMS

The patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) is a level of wellbeing, which is measured by the patient. The aim of this study was to determine if the proportion of patients who achieved an acceptable level of function (PASS) after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) was different based on the status of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) at the time of surgery.

METHODS

A total of 114 patients who underwent UKA for isolated medial osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee were included in the study. Their mean age was 65 years (SD 10). No patient underwent a bilateral procedure. Those who had undergone ACL reconstruction during the previous five years were excluded. The Knee injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (KOOS ADL) function score was used as the primary outcome measure with a PASS of 87.5, as described for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Patients completed all other KOOS subscales, Lysholm score, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and the Veterans Rand 12-item health survey score. Failure was defined as conversion to TKA.

RESULTS

Survivorship at ten years was 97% in both the ACL-deficient and ACL-intact groups. The mean survival was 16.1 years (95% confidence interval (CI) 15.3 to 16.8) for the ACL-deficient group and 15.6 years (95% CI 14.8 to 16.361) for the ACL-intact group (p = 0.878). At a mean of nine years (SD 3.5) in the ACL-deficient group, 32 patients (87%) reached the PASS for the KOOS ADL. In the ACL-intact group, at a mean of 8.6 years (SD 3) follow-up, 63 patients (85%) reached PASS for the KOOS ADL. There was no significant difference in the percentage of patients who reached PASS for all KOOS subscales and Lysholm between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

PASS was achieved in 85% of all UKAs for KOOS ADL, similar to reports for TKA. Fixed-bearing, medial, non-robotically-assisted UKA resulted in 97% survival at ten years in both the ACL-deficient and ACL-intact groups. There was no significant difference in all outcomes between the two groups. Understanding PASS will allow better communication between surgeons and patients to improve the surgical management of patients with single compartment OA of the knee. This study provides mid- to long-term data supporting the use of PASS to document outcomes following UKA. PASS was met in more than 85% of patients with no differences between ACL-deficient and ACL-intact knees at a mean follow-up of nine years. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(8):1367-1372.

Do Fixed or Mobile Bearing Implants Have Better Survivorship in Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty? A Study From the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry

BACKGROUND

During the last 5 years, there has been an increase in the use of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to treat knee osteoarthritis in Australia, and these account for almost 6% of annual knee replacement procedures. However, there is debate as to whether a fixed bearing or a mobile bearing design is best for decreasing revision for loosening and disease progression as well as improving survivorship. Small sample sizes and possible confounding in the studies on the topic may have masked differences between fixed and mobile bearing designs.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Using data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), we selected the four contemporary designs of medial compartment UKA: mobile bearing, fixed modular, all-polyethylene, and fixed molded metal-backed used for the treatment of osteoarthritis to ask: (1) How do the different designs of unicompartmental knees compare with survivorship as measured by cumulative percentage revision (CPR)? (2) Is there a difference in the revision rate between designs as a function of patient sex or age? (3) Do the reasons for revision differ, and what types of revision procedures are performed when these UKA are revised?

METHODS

The AOANJRR longitudinally maintains data on all primary and revision joint arthroplasties, with nearly 100% capture. The study population included all UKA procedures undertaken for osteoarthritis between September 1999 and December 2018. Of 56,628 unicompartmental knees recorded during the study period, 50,380 medial UKA procedures undertaken for osteoarthritis were included in the analysis after exclusion of procedures with unknown bearing types (31 of 56,628), lateral or patellofemoral compartment UKA procedures (5657 of 56,628), and those performed for a primary diagnosis other than osteoarthritis (560 of 56,628). There were 50,380 UKA procedures available for analysis. The study group consisted of 40% (20,208 of 50,380) mobile bearing UKA, 35% (17,822 of 50,380) fixed modular UKA, 23% (11,461 of 50,380) all-polyethylene UKA, and 2% (889 of 50,380) fixed molded metal-backed UKA. There were similar sex proportions and age distributions for each bearing group. The overall mean age of patients was 65 ± 9.4 years, and 55% (27,496 of 50,380) of patients were males. The outcome measure was the CPR, which was defined using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship to describe the time to the first revision. Hazard ratios from Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for sex and age, were performed to compare the revision rates among groups. The cohort was stratified into age groups of younger than 65 years and 65 years and older to compare revision rates as a function of age. Differences among bearing groups for the major causes and modes of revision were assessed using hazard ratios.

RESULTS

At 15 years, fixed modular UKA had a CPR of 16% (95% CI 15% to 17%). In comparison, the CPR was 23% (95% CI 22% to 24%) for mobile bearing UKA, 26% (95% CI 24% to 27%) for all-polyethylene UKA, and 20% (95% CI 16% to 24%) for fixed molded metal-backed UKA. The lower revision rate for fixed modular UKA was seen through the entire period compared with mobile bearing UKA (hazard ratio 1.5 [95% CI 1.4 to 1.6]; p < 0.001) and fixed molded metal-backed UKA (HR 1.3 [95% CI 1.1 to 1.6]; p = 0.003), but it varied with time compared with all-polyethylene UKA. The findings were consistent when stratified by sex or age. Although all-polyethylene UKA had the highest revision rate overall and for patients younger than 65 years, for patients aged 65 years and older, there was no difference between all-polyethylene and mobile bearing UKA. When compared with fixed modular UKA, a higher revision risk for loosening was shown in both mobile bearing UKA (HR 1.7 [95% CI 1.5 to 1.9]; p < 0.001) and all-polyethylene UKA (HR 2.4 [95% CI 2.1 to 2.7]; p < 0.001). The revision risk for disease progression was higher for all-polyethylene UKA at all time points (HR 1.4 [95% CI 1.3 to 1.6]; p < 0.001) and for mobile bearing UKA after 8 years when each were compared with fixed modular UKA (8 to 12 years: HR 1.4 [95% CI 1.2 to 1.7]; p < 0.001; 12 or more years: HR 1.9 [95% CI 1.5 to 2.3]; p < 0.001). The risk of revision to TKA was higher for mobile bearing UKA compared with fixed modular UKA (HR 1.4 [95% CI 1.3 to 1.5]; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

If UKA is to be considered for the treatment of isolated medial compartment osteoarthritis, the fixed modular UKA bearing has the best survivorship of the current UKA designs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

What is the evidence for clinical use of advanced technology in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

With an aim of improving prosthesis survivorship of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), use of computer-assisted technologies (CATs) such as robotics, has been on the rise to reduce intraoperative errors in surgical technique. In light of recent influx of CATs in the UKA, a review of these innovations will help providers to understand their clinical utility.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines.

RESULTS

Among 19 studies comparing robot-assisted UKA with conventional UKA, only 32% were randomized control trials, 47% reported minimum mean follow-up of 2 years, and 21% evaluated prosthesis survival. Similar results were obtained for navigation-assisted UKA and UKA performed with patient-specific instrumentation.

CONCLUSION

While CATs seem to reduce the surgical errors in UKA, the evidence on the efficacy of any of the studied CATs to improve survivorship remains limited and there are issues related to cost-effectiveness, learning curve, and increase in operating time.

More Anterior in vivo Contact Position in Patients With Fixed-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty During Daily Activities Than in vitro Wear Simulator

BACKGROUND

While in vitro wear simulation of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) showed outstanding long-term wear performance, studies reported that polyethylene (PE) wear was responsible for 12% fixed-bearing (FB) UKA failure. This paper aimed to quantify the in vivo 6-degrees-of-freedom (6-DOF) knee kinematics and contact positions of FB UKA during daily activities and compare with the previous results of in vitro wear simulator.

METHODS

Fourteen patients following unilateral medial FB UKA received a CT scan and dual fluoroscopic imaging during level walking, single-leg deep lunge, and sit-to-stand motion for evaluating in vivo 6-DOF FB UKA kinematics. The closest point between surface models of the femoral condyle and PE insert was determined to locate the medial compartmental articular contact positions, which were normalized relative to the PE insert length. The in vivo contact area was compared with the in vitro wear region in previous simulator studies.

RESULTS

The in vivo contact positions during daily activities were more anterior than those in the previous in vitro wear simulator studies (p < 0.001). Significant differences in the femoral anteroposterior translation and tibial internal rotation during the stance phase were observed and compared with those in lunge and sit-to-stand motions (p < 0.05). The in vivo contact position located anteriorly and medially by 5.2 ± 2.7 and 1.8 ± 1.6 mm on average for the stance phase, 1.0 ± 2.4 and 0.9 ± 1.5 mm for the lunge, and 2.1 ± 3.3 and 1.4 ± 1.4 mm for sit-to-stand motion. The in vivo contact position was in the more anterior part during the stance phase (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The current study revealed that the contact position of FB UKA was located anteriorly and medially on the PE insert during in vivo weight-bearing activities and different from previous findings of the in vitro wear simulator. We should take in vivo 6-DOF knee kinematics and contact patterns of FB UKA into account to reproduce realistic wear performance for in vitro wear simulator and to improve implant design.

A Comparison of Mobile- and Fixed-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasties in the Treatment of Medial Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 1,861 Patients

Many studies have compared mobile-bearing (MB) and fixed-bearing (FB) unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKAs) in patients with unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (OA). The present systematic review and meta-analysis examined the differences in the clinical and radiological outcomes of MB UKA and FB UKA. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, as well as Google Scholar were searched for relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that compared MB UKA and FB UKA were included. The weighted mean difference in the knee scores and range of motion (ROM) as well as the summary odds ratio of postoperative mechanical axis alignment, radiolucency, revision rate, and complications were calculated in the MB UKA and FB UKA groups. Finally, 2 RCTs and 11 cohort studies that involved 1,861 patients (1,996 knees) were included. The FB UKA group showed better postoperative Knee Society score (KSS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and ROM than the MB UKA group. However, the MB UKA group had more knees with a neutral limb alignment and a lower incidence of polyethylene wear than the FB UKA group. No significant differences were observed between the groups with respect to radiolucency, revision rate, and complications, such as arthritis progression, aseptic loosening, and postoperative pain. This meta-analysis has demonstrated that both prostheses provided excellent clinical outcomes and survivorship in patients with unicompartmental knee OA. The MB UKA group achieved the expected postoperative neutral limb alignment as compared with the FB UKA group, while the FB UKA group showed higher knee scores and superior ROM than the MB UKA group. Limited evidence is currently available; therefore, the results of our meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution.

No difference in patient satisfaction after mobile bearing or fixed bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has excellent survival rates using one of the two implant designs: mobile bearing (MB) or fixed bearing (FB). There is a lack of studies comparing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of both implants. This study aimed to document and compare PROs of MB UKA to FB UKA at 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery.

METHODS

A single high-volume surgeon, retrospective cohort study with prospectively collected data of two groups of UKA patients, with a MB (n = 66) or FB (n = 97) implant. Primary outcome was patient satisfaction (0-10; NRS). Secondary outcomes were pain at rest (NRS), pain during activity (NRS), function (OKS, KOOS-PS), quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), anchor pain, anchor function and anchor recovery. PROs were collected 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. The complication rate and revision rate within one year after surgery were recorded.

RESULTS

For the MB group, the median NRS satisfaction score was 9.0 (8.0-10.0) compared to 9.0 (8.0-9.5) for the FB group at 6 months (p = 0.620). Similar scores were found at 12 and 24 months; both MB 9.0 (8.0-10.0) and FB 9.0 (8.0-10.0) (p = 0.556 and p = 0.522, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences between MB and FB groups in all secondary outcomes postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Medial UKA performed by a high-volume surgeon, using a MB or a FB implant, results in excellent patient satisfaction, pain relief, functional improvement and quality of life improvement at 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery. The recommendation and use of one over the other is not justified based on the outcomes in the current study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Titanium Niobium Nitride Mobile-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Results in Good to Excellent Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes in Metal Allergy Patients With Medial Knee Osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

The main purpose of the present study was to analyze the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients with positive skin patch tests who underwent medial mobile-bearing titanium niobium nitride unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) during a mid-term follow-up.

METHODS

Thirty-seven patients with positive skin patch tests were included in this prospective study. The clinical evaluation consisted of Oxford Knee Score and Knee Society Score (KSS) reports. Each patient was clinically evaluated the day before surgery (T₀) as well as at T₁ (11.9 ± 1.3 months) and during the final follow-up T₂ (67.2 ± 19.1 months). The positioning of the UKA was evaluated during the final follow-up using standardized radiographs (T₂: 67.2 ± 19.1 months).

RESULTS

Oxford and KSS ranged from a respective mean preoperative value of 23.0 ± 2.7 and 51.5 ± 5.0 to 42.1 ± 1.7 and 87.6 ± 2.2, respectively, at T₁ (P < .001) and to the final values of 45.0 ± 1.9 and 91.9 ± 3.4, respectively, at T₂ (P < .001 both vs T₁ and T₂). At T₂, the mean femoral angle was 7.0° ± 4.5°, mean tibial angle was 3.0° ± 2.1°, and mean tibial slope was 5.1° ± 3.2°. A significant difference was found between KSS and Oxford with ANOVA for repeated measures over time (P < .001). The Oxford and KSS scores showed significant improvements during each follow-up. No complications were found, and not a single patient required a revision surgery during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

The hypoallergenic titanium niobium nitride mobile-bearing UKA showed comparable results to standard CoCr UKA regardless of the gender, age, BMI, and implant size of metal allergy patients with medial knee osteoarthritis. Careful patient selection processes and accurate medical histories played key roles in the choice of hypersensitivity-friendly implants.

Fixed- versus mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) can be either a fixed bearing (FB) or a mobile bearing (MB) construct with controversy as to which design is superior. This question is addressed with a systematic review and meta-analysis. A literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Studies were reviewed according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria developed in advance. We compared the differences in clinical and radiological outcomes between the FB and MB UKAs. Analyses were performed with the Review Manager and STATA software. A total of 17 studies involving 2612 knees were included. No significant differences were presented between the FB and MB prostheses in clinical and radiological outcomes. However, it was evident that there were differences in the modes and timing of the failures, bearing dislocation led to earlier failures in the MB prosthesis, while the FB prosthesis failed later due to polyethylene wear. There was no evidence of publication bias using the incidence of revisions. There is no significant difference between the FB and MB UKAs; however, there are differences in the modes and timing of failures.

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

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a bone- and ligament-sparing alternative to total knee arthroplasty in the patients with end-stage single-compartment degeneration of the knee. Despite being a successful procedure, the multiple advantages of UKA do not correlate with its usage, most likely due to the concerns regarding prosthesis survivability, patient selection, ideal bearing design, and judicious use of advanced technology among many others. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to review and summarize the debated literature and discuss the controversies as “Ten Enigmas of UKA.”

Patient outcomes in Anteromedial osteoarthritis patients over 80 years old undergoing Oxford Unicompartmental knee Arthroplasty in China

Background

The use of Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) has increased rapidly in both Western and Asian populations, with excellent functional outcomes and high patient satisfaction. While previous evidence regarding clinical outcomes and survival rates after Oxford UKA was based on studies in Western populations, the results may be different in Asian patients. The relevance of age for postoperative function after Oxford UKA also remains unclear. Hence, the aim of our study was to clarify the effectiveness and safety of Oxford UKA in Asian patients aged over 80 years.

Methods

A retrospective review was performed and included 195 patients (209 knees) who underwent an Oxford UKA between June 2015 and July 2018. We divided the patients into three groups by age: Group 1, 60–69 years; Group 2, 70–79 years; and Group 3, over 80 years. We used the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score and Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) Universities Osteoarthritis Index score to evaluate the general condition of the patients’ knees before surgery and at last follow-up. We also recorded perioperative and short-term complications.

Result

Group 1 consisted of 60 patients (60 knees); Group 2, 70 patients (79 knees); and Group 3, 65 patients (70 knees). The mean follow-up was 21.34 ± 12.04, 22.08 ± 11.38, and 21.76 ± 10.20 months in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. At last follow-up, the patients in Group 3 showed lower function scores compared to groups 1 and 2 (P < 0.05), but the HSS scores and the WOMAC scores were significantly improved in all three groups. In terms of perioperative and other complications, the three age groups did not differ significantly.

Conclusion

Oxford UKA is an effective and safe treatment for osteoarthritis, even in elderly patients in China. Elderly patients have lower knee function scores than younger patients. However, the knee joint pain of the elderly patients was relieved and function improved compared to the preoperative condition.

Ten-Year Survivorship, Patient-Reported Outcomes, and Satisfaction of a Fixed-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Background

We sought to determine the 10-year survivorship and reasons for revision for a fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) design. In addition, we report on patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction and compare results of medial vs lateral compartment UKA and cemented vs cementless UKA with the same design.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study on a single-surgeon case series using a single fixed-bearing UKA design in 158 consecutive patients who underwent 177 UKA procedures between July 2000 and December 2010. Cases missing follow-up within the last year, clinically or via telephone, were excluded (n = 17, 10%). A cumulative incidence competing risk model was used to evaluate the cumulative incidence of failure.

Results

Cumulative incidence of revision at a mean follow-up of 10 years was 13%. The majority of revisions (43%, 10/23) were for aseptic tibial component loosening, followed by progression of osteoarthritis (5/23, 22%). All Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System measures demonstrated mean T-scores within one standard deviation from the US population norm. The mean Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement was 96.9 (range, 40-100). The mean pain score was 3.8 (range, 0-8). Eighty-six percent of patients were satisfied with the UKA.

Conclusions

At 10-year follow-up, the most common causes for revision were aseptic tibial loosening and adjacent compartment knee arthroplasty, and similar results were found for medial vs lateral compartment and for cemented vs cementless UKA. Surgeons should consider these findings for future UKA designs, and this represents the first study reporting on survivorship and outcomes of this specific UKA design.

Comparison of Fixed-Bearing and Mobile-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have compared fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (FB-UKA) with mobile-bearing UKA (MB-UKA), suggesting that both procedures have good clinical outcomes. However, which treatment is more beneficial for patients is controversial. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the postoperative outcomes, including the revision rate, complications, functional results, range of motion, and femoral-tibial angle, between the 2 procedures.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases starting from August 2017 to May 2018. The publication date of articles was not restricted. Before we submit our contribution, we have re-searched it again. Articles that directly compared the postoperative outcomes of the 2 prosthesis type were included.

RESULTS

A total of 15 comparative studies were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled data indicated no differences between the 2 operation modes in terms of revision rates, complications, and knee function, but earlier failure occurred more frequently with the MB design.

CONCLUSION

Both the arthroplasty types provided satisfactory clinical results for patients with classic indications. However, MB-UKA tended to fail in early postoperative years whereas fixed-bearing UKA in later postoperative years. Therefore treatment options should be carefully considered for each patient, and surgeons should still use their personal experience when deciding between these options.