Unicompartmental vs. segmental bicompartmental vs. total knee replacement: comparison of clinical outcomes

Automated system for classifying uni-bicompartmental knee osteoarthritis by using redefined residual learning with convolutional neural network

Knee Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common joint diseases that may cause physical disability associated with a significant personal and socioeconomic burden. X-ray imaging is the cheapest and most common method to detect Knee (OA). Accurate classification of knee OA can help physicians manage treatment efficiently and slow knee OA progression. This study aims to classify knee OA X-ray images according to anatomical types, such as uni or bicompartmental. The study proposes a deep learning model for classifying uni or bicompartmental knee OA based on redefined residual learning with CNN. The proposed model was trained, validated, and tested on a dataset containing 733 knee X-ray images (331 normal Knee images, 205 unicompartmental, and 197 bicompartmental knee images). The results show 61.81 % and 68.33 % for accuracy and specificity, respectively. Then, the performance of the proposed model was compared with different pre-trained CNNs. The proposed model achieved better results than all pre-trained CNNs.

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.

Proprioception and Mechanoreceptors in Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Literature Review

PURPOSE

Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common chronic diseases in the world. It is frequently accompanied by high levels of persistent pain, as well as substantial impairments in function and functional capacity. This review aims to systematically analyze the changes in proprioception and related mechanoreceptors in OA patients.

METHODS

Studies from September 2013 to September 2023 were identified by conducting searches on the PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus electronic databases following the PRISMA statement. One reviewer independently assessed and screened the literature, extracted the data, and graded the studies. The body of evidence underwent an evaluation and grading process using the ROBINS-I tool, which was specifically designed to assess the risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions. Results were summarized using descriptive methods.

RESULTS

A search through 37 studies yielded 14 clinical studies that were ultimately included. The primary focus of the studies was on the knee joint, particularly the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL). The studies found that PCL in OA patients had impaired proprioceptive accuracy, possibly due to changes in mechanoreceptors (Ruffini, Pacini, and Golgi Mazzoni corpuscles). This suggests that dysfunctional articular mechanoreceptors, especially in severe cases of OA, may contribute to reduced proprioception. Dynamic stabilometry also identified significant proprioceptive deficits in patients with knee articular cartilage lesions, underscoring the impact of such lesions on knee proprioception.

CONCLUSIONS

Literature data have shown that proprioceptive accuracy may play an important role in OA, particularly in the knee PCL and cartilage. However, the role of proprioception and related mechanoreceptors needs to be further clarified. Future studies focusing on the relationship between proprioception, OA disease, and symptoms, considering age and gender differences, and exploring OA joints other than the knee should be conducted to improve clinical and surgical outcomes in cases where proprioception and mechanoreceptors are impaired in OA patients.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Spacer Block Technique Was Superior to Intramedullary Guide Technique in Coronal Alignment of Femoral Component after Fixed-Bearing Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Case-Control Study

Backgrounds and Objectives: The spacer block technique in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has still a concern related to the precise position of the component in the coronal and sagittal planes compared to intramedullary guide technique. The purposes of this study were to explore whether the spacer block technique would improve the radiological alignment of implants and clinical outcomes compared with the outcomes of the intramedullary guide technique in fixed-bearing medial UKA. Materials and Methods: In total, 115 patients who underwent unilateral, fixed-bearing medial UKA were retrospectively reviewed and divided into group IM (intramedullary guides; n = 39) and group SB (spacer blocks; n = 76). Clinical assessment included range-of-motion and patient-reported outcomes. Radiological assessment included the mechanical femorotibial angle, coronal and sagittal alignments of the femoral and tibial components, and coronal femorotibial congruence angle. Results: All clinical outcomes showed no significant differences between groups. The coronal femoral component angle was valgus 2.4° ± 4.9° in IM group and varus 1.1° ± 3.2° (p < 0.001). In group IM, the number of outlier in coronal femoral component angle (<−10° or 10°<) was 3 cases, while in group SB, there was no outlier (p = 0.014). The coronal femorotibial congruence angle was significantly less in group SB (mean 1.9°, range, −3.2°~8.2°) than in group IM (mean 3.4°, range, −9.6°~16.5°) (p = 0.028). Conclusions: In the group SB, the coronal alignment of femoral component was closer to neutral, and outlier was less frequent than in the group IM. The spacer block technique was more beneficial in achieving proper coronal alignment of the femoral component and congruence of femorotibial components compared to the intramedullary guide technique in fixed-bearing medial UKAs.

Knee arthroplasty utilization trends from 2010 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Interest in partial knee arthroplasty procedures including unicompartmental arthroplasty (UKA), patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA), and bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (BKA) has increased due to their bone and ligament preservation compared to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Implant designs, changing thoughts on appropriate indications for partial knee arthroplasty, and availability of navigation also impacted the field over the last decade. The aims of this study were to evaluate trends over the last decade in utilization of 1) partial and total knee arthroplasty; and 2) computer-assistance in knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using the PearlDiver database. Patients who underwent PFA, UKA, BKA, and TKA for an indication of osteoarthritis (OA) were identified using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Trends analysis from 2010 to 2019 was conducted to compare utilization based on procedure type and computer-assistance. Statistical analysis was conducted using Compounded Annual Growth Rates (CAGR) and linear regression.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2019, there was a significant decrease in utilization of PFA (CAGR: -5.73 %; p = 0.011) and BKA (CAGR: -10.49 %; p = 0.013), but no significant difference in that of UKA (p = 0.224) and TKA (p = 0.421). There was a significant increase in the utilization of computer assistance for both UKA (CAGR: +19.81 %; p = 0.002) and TKA (CAGR: +3.90 %; p = 0.038), but there was no significant difference for computer-assisted PFA (p = 0.724) and BKA (p = 0.951).

CONCLUSIONS

TKA is still the most common arthroplasty procedure for OA. Decreased utilization of PFA and BKA may be explained by reported failure and revision rates for PFA and BKA compared to TKA.

Integrating wearables and modelling for monitoring rehabilitation following total knee joint replacement

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Wearable inertial devices integrated with modelling and cloud computing have been widely adopted in the sports sector, however, their use in the health and medical field has yet to be fully realised. To date, there have been no reported studies concerning the use of wearables as a surrogate tool to monitor knee joint loading during recovery following a total knee joint replacement. The objective of this study is to firstly evaluate if peak tibial acceleration from wearables during gait is a good surrogate metric for computer modelling predicted functional knee loading; and secondly evaluate if traditional clinical patient related outcomes measures are consistent with wearable predictions.

METHODS

Following ethical approval, four healthy participants were used to establish the relationship between computer modelling predicted knee joint loading and wearable measured tibial acceleration. Following this, ten patients who had total knee joint replacements were then followed during their 6-week rehabilitation. Gait analysis, wearable acceleration, computer models of knee joint loading, and patient related outcomes measures including the Oxford knee score and range of motion were recorded.

RESULTS

A linear correlation (R² of 0.7-0.97) was observed between peak tibial acceleration (from wearables) and musculoskeletal model predicted knee joint loading during gait in healthy participants first. Whilst patient related outcome measures (Oxford knee score and patient range of motion) were observed to improve consistently during rehabilitation, this was not consistent with all patient's tibial acceleration. Only those patients that exhibited increasing peak tibial acceleration over 6-weeks rehabilitation were positively correlated with the Oxford knee score (R² of 0.51 to 0.97). Wearable predicted tibial acceleration revealed three patients with a consistent knee loading, five patients with improving knee loading, and two patients with declining knee loading during recovery. Hence, 20% of patients did not present with satisfactory joint loading following total knee joint replacement and this was not detected with current patient related outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of inertial measurement units or wearables in this study provided additional insight into patients who were not exhibiting functional improvements in joint loading, and offers clinicians an 'off-site' early warning metric to identify potential complications during recovery and provide the opportunity for early intervention. This study has important implications for improving patient outcomes, equity, and for those who live in rural regions.

Outcomes of Bi-unicompartmental Versus Total Knee Arthroplasty for the Treatment of Medial and Lateral Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Comparative Studies

PURPOSE

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate differences in functional outcomes between simultaneous bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (Bi-UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for the treatment of medial and lateral knee osteoarthritis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

According to the PRISMA statement, a comprehensive search was conducted to identify studies reporting comparative results of the Bi-UKA versus the TKA. Of 953 titles, 6 studies met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 286 patients were identified, of which 137 underwent Bi-UKA and 149 TKA. TKA reported a mean hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle of 179.4 ± 2.4 compared to that in Bi-UKA measuring 177.2 ± 2.7 (p = 0.0001, 95% CI - 3.02 to - 1.38). No difference was found in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) pain (4 ± 1.6 and 4.2 ± 1.3 for Bi-UKA and TKA, respectively; p = 0.4996, 95% CI - 0.86 to 0.43). Bi-UKA was favorable in terms of WOMAC function (7.5 ± 1.9 and 9 ± 1.9 for Bi-UKA and TKA, respectively; p = 0.001, 95% CI - 2.29 to - 0.61) and WOMAC stiffness (1.6 ± 1 and 2.4 ± 0.7 for Bi-UKA and TKA, respectively; p = 0.0001, 95% CI - 1.18 to - 0.42). Bi-UKA showed a better Knee Society Score (KSS) in comparison to TKA (79.7 ± 7.8 and 75.4 ± 10.5 for Bi-UKA and TKA, respectively; p = 0.0021, 95% CI 1.58-7.02). The differences in postoperative outcomes scores between Bi-UKA and TKA were lower than their respective minimum clinically important differences.

CONCLUSIONS

When Bi-UKA and TKA are compared for the treatment of medial and lateral knee osteoarthritis, Bi-UKA are favorable in terms of WOMAC and KSS even though these values are lower than the minimum clinically important differences; moreover, similar postoperative hip-knee-ankle angle can be expected 3 years after Bi-UKA and TKA.