Abstract
Aims
The primary objective of this study was to compare short-term implant survival between cemented and cementless fixation for the mobile-bearing Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) across various age groups. The secondary objectives were to compare modes of failure and to evaluate patient-reported outcomes.
Methods
A total of 25,762 patients, comprising 8,022 cemented (31.1%) and 17,740 cementless (68.9%) medial UKA cases, were included from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register. Patient stratification was performed based on age: < 50 years, 50 to 59 years, 60 to 69 years, and ≥ 70 years. Survival rates and hazard ratios were calculated. Modes of failure were described and postoperative change in baseline for the Oxford Knee Score and numerical rating scale for pain at six and 12 months’ follow-up were compared.
Results
The 2.5-year implant survival rate of cementless UKA was significantly higher compared to cemented UKA in patients aged younger than 60 years (age < 50 years: 95.9% (95% CI 93.8 to 97.3) vs 90.9% (95% CI 87.0 to 93.7); p = 0.007; and 50 to 59 years: 95.6% (95% CI 94.9 to 96.3) vs 94.0% (95% CI 92.8 to 95.0); p = 0.009). Cemented UKA exhibited significantly higher revision rates for tibial loosening (age < 50 and 60 to 69 years), while cementless UKA was associated with higher revision rates for periprosthetic fractures (age ≥ 60 years). Patient-reported outcomes were similar between both fixation techniques, irrespective of age.
Conclusion
Cementless fixation resulted in superior short-term implant survival compared to cemented fixation among younger patients undergoing Oxford mobile-bearing medial UKA. Distinct failure patterns between fixation techniques emerged across various age groups, with revisions for tibial loosening being associated with cemented UKA in younger patients, while revisions for periprosthetic fractures were specifically identified among elderly patients undergoing cementless UKA.
Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2025;107-B(3):329–336.
