When performing total knee replacement (TKR), surgeons must select a size of tibial component tray that most closely matches the anatomy of the proximal tibia. As implants are available in a limited range of sizes, it may be necessary to slightly under or oversize the component. There are concerns overhang could lead to pain from irritation of soft tissues, and underhang could lead to subsidence and failure.

154 TKRs at 1- or 5-year follow up were reviewed prospectively. Oxford Knee Score (OKS), WOMAC and SF-12 was recorded along with pain scores. Scaled radiographs were reviewed and grouped into perfect sizing (78 TKRs, 50.6%), underhang in isolation (48 TKRs, 31.1%), minor overhang 1–3 mm (10 TKRs, 6.49%) or major overhang >3 mm (18 TKRs, 11.7%).

There was no significant difference in the SF-12 (p=0.356), post-operative OKS (p=0.401) or WOMAC (p=0.466) score. For the OKS, there was no difference for the scores collected at 1 year (p=0.176) or at 5 years (p=0.883).

Pre-operative OKS was well matched between the groups (p=0.152). There was no significant difference in the improvement in OKS from pre-operative scores (p=0.662). There was no significant difference in either the OKS or WOMAC pain scores (p=0.237 and 0.542 respectively).

There was no significant association of medial overhang with?medial knee pain (p=1.000) or lateral overhang with lateral knee pain (p=0.569) when compared to the group of patients with a well sized tibial component.

Our results suggest that tibial component overhang or underhang has no detrimental affect on outcome or pain scores. Surgeons should continue to select the tibial component that most closely fits the rim of the proximal tibia while accepting slight overhang if necessary due to the potential longer-term complications of subsidence and premature failure with an undersized tibial tray.

The long-term clinical and radiological results of 63 uncemented Low Contact Stress (LCS) total knee replacements in 47 patients with rheumatoid arthritis were reviewed. The average age at the time of surgery was 69 years (53–81). At a mean follow up of 22 years (20–25), 12 patients (17 knees) were alive, 27 (36 knees) had died, and 8 patients (10 knees) were lost to follow-up.

Revision was necessary in seven patients (7 knees) (11.1%) at mean 12.1 years following surgery. Four revisions were performed due to meniscal bearing wear, two for collapse of the tibial component, and one for aseptic loosening. Evidence of post-operative infection occurred in two knees (3.2%) within 6 weeks of surgery but resolved with antibiotics. Within the group of deceased patients, five had undergone revision (included in total revisions) but otherwise the primary implant remained in vivo.

For all living patients, the mean Oxford Knee Score (/48) was 30.2 (16–41) at latest follow up at mean 19.5 years (15–24.7) following surgery. Mean active flexion was 105 degrees (90–150) at this time point.

Our recorded survival rate of the uncemented LCS total knee replacements in patients with rheumatoid arthritis was therefore 88.9% at mean 22 years, or worst-case survival of 73.0% if patients lost to follow-up were considered failures. From a review of the literature and as far as we are aware, this study represents the longest follow up of any uncemented knee arthroplasty performed in a cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Introduction and Aims: The aim of this paper was to assess the 10 to 15-year clinical and radiographic results of uncemented LCS meniscal-bearing total knee replacements used to revise failed uni-compartmental knee replacements.

Method: Eleven (5 M: 6 F) cementless LCS meniscal-bearing total knee replacements were implanted in patients who had failed uni-compartmental knee replacements for medial compartment osteoarthritis. Mean time interval between the uni-compartmental knee replacement and the LCS total knee replacement was 18 months (12–72 months). Minimum follow-up of all patients reviewed was 10 years (mean 12.9 years). Average age of patients at the time of surgery was 60.1 years (47–74 years). Clinical and radiographic analysis was performed. American knee society pain and function scores were determined and Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was conducted. Failure was defined as revision due to any cause.

Results: At the time of the 10 to 15-year follow-up, all 11 patients were alive and were all reviewed. Four patients (three males, one female) had a revision of their LCS total knee replacement. The average time to revision of the LCS total knee replacement was 26 months (1–60 months). The average knee society pain and function scores were 80 and 45 at the final follow-up evaluation. The average range of movement was 95 degrees (80–100 degrees). The survival rate of 60% (95 % confidence interval) was noted at 12 years.

Conclusion: After 10 to 14 years of follow-up, the cementless LCS meniscal bearing total knee replacement for a previously failed uni-compartmental knee replacement was found to have a 37% revision rate.