Long-term Survivorship and Failure Modes of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Panorama Orthopedics and Spine Center, Golden, CO, USA, .
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (Impact Factor: 2.88). 08/2012; 471(1). DOI: 10.1007/s11999-012-2517-y
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: In a previously reported series of 51 patients with 62 cemented, fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasties, we reported a 10-year, 98% survival rate with an average knee score of 92 points. The survivorship and modes of failure past 10 years are incompletely understood. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: At 15-year followup we sought to determine (1) the overall durability and survivorship of this design; (2) modes of failure; and (3) the progression of arthritis in the nonresurfaced compartments. METHODS: Nineteen knees in 16 patients were available for study with 34 patients lost to death and one lost to followup. At 15 years, we analyzed the Kaplan-Meier survivorship as well as durability with regard to radiographic loosening and knee scores, determined modes of failure, and assessed radiographs for degeneration in the nonresurfaced compartments. RESULTS: Fifteen-year survivorship was 93% and 20-year survivorship was 90%. Four of 62 knees were revised to total knee arthroplasty at a mean of 144 months. One knee was revised for patellofemoral and lateral compartment degeneration, one for lateral compartment degeneration, one for polyethylene disengagement and metallosis, and one for pain of unclear etiology. No patients had aseptic loosening or osteolysis. The mean knee score was 78 at latest followup. Arthritic progression in the nonresurfaced compartments was common although symptomatic in only two patients. CONCLUSIONS: With this cemented, fixed-bearing design, the failure rates were low, there were no cases of failure secondary to wear or loosening, and the survivorship was similar to that reported for total knee arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this review article is to analyze the clinical effectiveness of total knee replacement (TKR) compared to unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) in patients with medial unicompartmental osteoarthritis (MUO) in terms of survival rates, revision rates and postoperative complications. The search engine was MedLine. The keywords used were: medial knee osteoarthritis. Three thousand and ninety-six articles were found on 28 April 2014. Of those, only twenty-eight were selected and reviewed because they were strictly focused on the topic of this article. Compared with those who have TKR, patients who undergo UKR have higher revision rates and lower survival rates at 5, 10 and 15 years. The reported overall risk of postoperative complications for patients undergoing TKR is 11%, compared with 4.3% for patients undergoing UKR. In conclusion, UKR have higher revision rates and lower survival rates than TKR. There is, however, an increased risk of postoperative complications after TKR.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Unicompartmental arthroplasty is an efficient and approved treatment option of unicompartmental arthritis of the knee, being performed with increasing frequency worldwide. Compared to total knee replacement, there are several advantages such as faster recovery, lower blood loss, better functional outcome and lower infection rates. However, higher revision rates are a frequent argument against the use of unicompartmental arthroplasty. The following article gives an overview of failure mechanisms and strategies for revision arthroplasty. This article is based on a selective literature review including PubMed and relevant print media. Our own clinical experience is considered as well.
    Der Orthop├Ąde 09/2014; 43(10). DOI:10.1007/s00132-014-3013-8 · 0.67 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is an increasingly popular option for the treatment of single-compartment knee osteoarthritis (OA) in adults. Two options for tibial resurfacing during UKA are (1) all-polyethylene inlays and (2) metal-backed onlays. The aim of this study was to determine whether there are any differences in clinical outcomes with inlay versus onlay tibial components. We identified 39 inlays and 45 onlays, with average 2.7- and 2.3-year follow-up, respectively, from a prospective robotic-assisted surgery database. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster University Arthritis Index (WOMAC), subcategorized by the pain, stiffness, and function subscores, at 2 years postoperatively. The secondary outcome was the need for secondary or revision surgery. Postoperative WOMAC pain score was 3.1 for inlays and 1.6 for onlays (p = 0.03). For 25 inlays and 30 onlays with both preoperative and postoperative WOMAC data, pain score improved from 8.3 to 4.0 for inlays versus from 9.2 to 1.7 for onlays (p = 0.01). Function score improved from 27.5 to 12.5 for inlays versus from 32.1 to 7.3 for onlays (p = 0.03). Four inlays and one onlay required a secondary or revision procedure (p = 0.18). We advise using metal-backed onlays during UKA to improve postoperative clinical outcomes.
    HSS Journal 02/2015; 11(1):43-9. DOI:10.1007/s11420-014-9421-9