Introduction. Unicompartmental Knee Replacement Arthroplasty (UKA) is a treatment option for early knee OA that appears under-utilised, partly because of a lack of clear guidance on how to best restore lasting knee function using such devices. Computational tools can help consider inherent uncertainty in patient anatomy, implant positioning and loading when predicting the performance of any implant. In the present research an approach for creating patient-specific finite element models (FEM) incorporating joint and muscle loads was developed to assess the response of the underlying bone to UKA implantation. Methods. As a basis for future uncertainty modelling of UKA performance, the geometriesof 173 lower limbs weregenerated from clinical CT scans. These were segmented (ScanIP, Simpleware Ltd, UK) to reconstruct the 3D surfaces of the femur, tibia, patella and fibula. The appropriate UKA prosthesis (DePuy, U.S.) size was automatically selected according to tibial plateau size and virtually positioned (Figure 1). Boolean operations and mesh generation were accomplished with ScanIP. A patient-specific musculoskeletal model was generated in open-source software OpenSim (Delp et al. 2007) based on the Gait2392 model. The model was scaled to a specific size and muscle insertion points were modified to corresponding points on lower limb of patient. Hip joint load, muscle forces and lower limb posture during gait cycle were calculated from the musculoskeletal model. The FE meshes of lower limb bones were transformed to the corresponding posture at each time point of a gait cycle and FE analyses were performed (Ansys, Inc. U.S) to evaluate the strain distribution on the tibial plateau in the implanted condition. Results. With the tibial component positioned above, along or below the joint line, the lower limb alignment was more varus, remained unaltered or more valgus respectively (Figure 2). With the tibial component positioned 3mm above the joint line, the peak strain in the underlying bone was 670 µstrain on medial (UKA) side and 6780 µstrain on the intact side. With the tibial component positioned 3mm below the joint line, the peak strain was 3010 µstrain on the medial side and 5330 µstrain on the intact side. Here, the strains on the medial side increased by 2640 µstrain whilst they were reduced by 1450 µstrain on the intact side compared to the unimplanted case. Conclusion. The present research has delivered a framework which can be exploited in future uncertainty modelling of UKA performance predictions. The patient-specific model incorporates loading, anatomical and material property variability, and can be applied to evaluate the performance of UKA prostheses for metrics such as stress/strain/micromotions in larger patient populations. For figures/tables, please contact authors directly.

Objectives: The results of knee arthroplasty are commonly assessed by survival analysis using revision as the endpoint. We have used the assessment of pain by a patient based questionnaire as an alternative after the Oxford Phase 3 UKA implanted by a minimally invasive technique.

Materials and Methods: Between January 1999 and May 2007, 223 consecutive Oxford arthroplasties were implanted by a single surgeon in a county hospital. Mean followup period was 35 months. Patients were assessed prospectively pre-operatively and after UKA in each year subsequently by a questionnaire. Survival analysis was undertaken.

Results: Preoperatively 85.8% had moderate or severe pain. Postoperatively, of five patients(2.6%) with persisting pain due to failure of using proper patient selection three were revised to TKA and two are still being followed. Three patients(1.6%) with moderate pain after using proper indication criteria accepted their complaints. Ten other patients (5.2%) experiencing moderate pain some time during the eight year period were successfully treated by arthroscopy. If after surgery patients experienced pain which had spontaneous improved by the second year, the initial pain was ignored. Totally 9.6% of patients experienced moderate or severe pain at some stage, and the failure rate was 4.2% in this period of 8 years’ experience.

Conclusion: When strict indications are followed the failure rate of the procedure can be minimised till 1.6% when moderate pain is considered the endpoint. As relief of pain is the primary reason for joint replacement, this is likely to be the most important factor in determining the long-term outcome for the patient.

UKA with mobile bearing is a one of the treatment of medial osteoarthritis. However, some reports refer to the risk of dislocation of the mobile bearing. Past reports pointed out that medial gap might be enlarged in deep flexion position (over 120 degrees), and says that it will lead to instability of the mobile bearing. The purpose of this study is to research the risk factors of enlargement of medial gap in deep flexion position.

We performed 81 UKAs with mobile bearing system from November 2013 to December 2015, and could evaluate 41 knees. This study of 41 knees included 9 males and 32 females, with average operation age of 75.4years(63–89years). The diagnosis was osteoarthritis in 39 knees and osteonecrosis in 2 knees. The UKA(Oxford partial knee microplasty, Biomet, Warsaw, IN) was used in all cases. We performed distal femur and proximal tibia osteotomy using CT-Free navigation system(Stryker Navigation System II/precision Knee Navigation ver4.0). And we inserted femoral and tibial trial component, then we placed an UKA tensioner on the medial component of the knee. Using tensioner under 30 lbs, we measured joint medial gap at 0,20,45,90,130(deep flexion) degrees. When we compared medial gap at 90 degrees position with at 130 degrees, we defined it as ‘instability group’ if there was gap enlargement more than 1mm, and defined it as ‘stability group’ if there wasn't.

We compared this two groups with regard to age, BMI, femoro-tibial angle (FTA), the diameter of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), tibial angle and tibial posterior slope angle of the implant. We evaluated preoperative and postoperative FTA by weightbearing long leg antero-posterior alignment view X-rays. We measured ACL diameter at its condyle level in coronal view of MRI. Also we evaluated tibial component implantation angle by postoperative CT using 3D template system. These measurement were analyzed statistically using t test.

The stability group contained 26 knees, and the instability group contained 15 knees. Compared with the stability group, the instability group indicated higher FTA (p=0.001). Between 20 and 90 degrees flexion position, there was no change of medial gap.

Dislocation of the mobile bearing is one of the complications of UKA and it will need re-operation. It is said to be caused by impingement of the bearing and osteophyte of femur. However, some reports said that dislocation was happened when the knee was flexed deeply or twisted, and there was no impingement. We think it may means that dislocation could be caused by medial gap enlargement.

This study indicates that higher FTA could be risk factor of dislocation of mobile bearing. It is important to evaluate preoperatively FTA by X-ray.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate accuracy of tibia cutting and tibia implantation in UKA which used navigation system for tibia cutting and tibia component implantation, and to evaluate clinical results.

We performed 72 UKAs using navigation system from November, 2012. This study of 72 knees included 56 females and 16 males with an average operation age of 74.2 years and an average body mass index (BMI) of 24.8 kg/m2. The diagnosis was osteoarthritis (OA) in 67 knees and osteonecrosis (ON) in 5 knees. The UKA (Oxford partial knee microplasty, Biomet, Warsaw, IN) was used all cases. We evaluated patients clinically using the Japanese orthopaedic association (JOA) score, range of motion (ROM), operation time, the amount of bleeding and complications. Patients were evaluated clinically at preoperation and final follow up in JOA score and ROM. As an radiologic examination, we evaluated preoperative and postoperative lower limb alignment in FTA (femoro-tibial angle) by weightbearing long leg antero-posterior alignment view X-rays. Also we evaluated a tibial component implantation angle by postoperative CT, and tibia cutting angle by intraoperative navigation system. We defined the tibial angle which a tibia functional axis and the tibia component made in coronal plane, also tibial posterior slope angle which a tibia axis and tibia component made in sagittal plane by CT. We measured tibial angle and tibial posterior slope angle by 3D template system.

We performed UKA in all cases mini-midvastus approach. At first we performed osteotomy of the proximal medial tibia using CT-Free navigation. At this procedure we performed osteotomy to do re-cut if check did cutting surface in navigation, and there was cutting error (>3°), and then to do check again in navigation. Next we did not use navigation and went the osteotomy of the distal femur with an IM rod and drill guide of microplasty system. And then we performed a trial and decided bearing gap and moved to cementing. At first we went cementing of the tibia component. At this procedure we went to drive implant again if check did implant surface in navigation, and there was implantation error(>3°), and to do check. We checked did tibia cutting, tibia implantation carefully in navigation. In addition, We sterilize a clips and use it came to be in this way possible for the check of the first osteotomy side exactly.

ROM was an average of 122.7° of preoperation became an average of 128.2° at final follow up, and JOA score was an average of 50.5 points of preoperation improved an average of 86.6 points at final follow up after UKA. An average of the operation time was 94 minutes, an average of the amount of bleeding was 137.7ml, and complications were one proximal type deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and one pin splinter joining pain by navigation, .Asetic loosening(tibial component) was one case, and this conversed the TKA.

In the radiologic evaluation, FTA was an average of 182.1° of preoperation corrected an average of 175.9°after UKA. In other words, an average of 6.2° were corrected by UKA. The tibia component implantation angle was an average of 90.18° in a measurement by the CT after UKA, intoraoperative tibia component implantation angle was an average of 90.32° in a measurement by the navigation system. These two differences did not accept the significant difference at an average of 1.33°.(P=0.5581). Similarly, the posterior slope angle were as follow; average of 5.65°by CT and average of 5.75°by navigation. These two differences did not accept the significant difference at an average of 1.33°. (P=0.6475)

Discussion: We performed UKA using navigation and evaluated the implantation accuracy for tibia osteotomy, tibia implantation. They were good alignment with an average of 90.18°, and outliers more than 3° were two cases(2.8%). It will be necessary to examine long-term progress including clinical results complications in future. We are performed UKA now in femur side using PSI(patient specific instruments) and tbia side using Navigation.

Introduction: The introduction of Oxford UKA byminimally invasive techniques has signiþcantly changed the treatment of anteromedial osteoarthritis of the knee joint. It is therefore necessary to evaluate this treatment option both clinically and radiologically. Aims: To study the radiographic and clinical results of the Oxford medial UKA in patients with a minimum follow up of 2 years in a single centre. Methods: A prospective independent study in which 67 consecutive UKAs were implanted by a single surgeon, using a minimally invasive technique. All patients with a minimum follow up of 2 years were pre- and postoperatively clinically evaluated by the AKSS and radiologically according to the Oxford Centre criteria, including ßuoroscopy. Results: Clinical: 28 patients with 30 prostheses (mean FU: 2.54 yr; mean age: 71.4 yrs) were included. The Knee Score improved signiþcantly from 58.7 (pre-op) to 95.0 (FU). The Function Score improved from 54.5 to 88.8. Mean ROM was 125û preoperatively and 121û at FU.Radiological: preop: varus deformity (n=18; mean 3.4û; range 2–10û), and valgus (n=12; 5.4, 2–12û). Postop: valgus alignment in all (n=30; 6.3û, 4–12û). Fifteen cases (50%) showed signs of patellofemoral arthritis (PFA); 11 cases with grade 2–3 PFA had a maximum pain score of 50. Full congruency of the tibial and femoral components was obtained in 18 cases, 10 cases were within and 2 out of margin according to the Oxford Centre criteria. Radiolucency below the tibial component was seen in 2 cases. Conclusions: This independent study has conþrmed preliminary þndings that using a minimally invasive approach good radiological and clinical results can be obtained. Presence of PFA had no inßuence on good clinical outcome.

Aims. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has higher revision rates than total knee arthroplasty (TKA). As revision of UKA may be less technically demanding than revision TKA, UKA patients with poor functional outcomes may be more likely to be offered revision than TKA patients with similar outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare clinical thresholds for revisions between TKA and UKA using revision incidence and patient-reported outcomes, in a large, matched cohort at early, mid-, and late-term follow-up. Methods. Analyses were performed on propensity score-matched patient cohorts of TKAs and UKAs (2:1) registered in the New Zealand Joint Registry between 1 January 1999 and 31 December 2019 with an Oxford Knee Score (OKS) response at six months (n, TKA: 16,774; UKA: 8,387), five years (TKA: 6,718; UKA: 3,359), or ten years (TKA: 3,486; UKA: 1,743). Associations between OKS and revision within two years following the score were examined. Thresholds were compared using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Reasons for aseptic revision were compared using cumulative incidence with competing risk. Results. Fewer TKA patients with ‘poor’ outcomes (≤ 25) subsequently underwent revision compared with UKA at six months (5.1% vs 19.6%; p < 0.001), five years (4.3% vs 12.5%; p < 0.001), and ten years (6.4% vs 15.0%; p = 0.024). Compared with TKA, the relative risk for UKA was 2.5-times higher for ‘unknown’ reasons, bearing dislocations, and disease progression. Conclusion. Compared with TKA, more UKA patients with poor outcomes underwent revision from early to long-term follow-up, and were more likely to undergo revision for ‘unknown’ reasons, which suggest a lower clinical threshold for UKA. For UKA, revision risk was higher for bearing dislocations and disease progression. There is supporting evidence that the higher revision UKA rates are associated with lower clinical thresholds for revision and additional modes of failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):269–276

Aims. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have both been shown to be effective treatments for osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. Many studies have compared the outcomes of the two treatments, but less so with the use of robotics, or individualized TKA alignment techniques. Functional alignment (FA) is a novel technique for performing a TKA and shares many principles with UKA. Our aim was to compare outcomes from a case-matched series of robotic-assisted UKAs and robotic-assisted TKAs performed using FA. Methods. From a prospectively collected database between April 2015 and December 2019, patients who underwent a robotic-assisted medial UKA (RA-UKA) were case-matched with patients who had undergone a FA robotic-assisted TKA (RA-TKA) during the same time period. Patients were matched for preoperative BMI, sex, age, and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS). A total of 101 matched pairs were eligible for final review. Postoperatively the groups were then compared for differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), range of motion (ROM), ability to ascend and descend stairs, and ability to kneel. Results. Both groups had significant improvements in mean FJS (65.1 points in the TKA group and 65.3 points in the UKA group) and mean Oxford Knee Score (OKS) (20 points in the TKA group and 18.2 in the UKA group) two years following surgery. The UKA group had superior outcomes at three months in the OKS and at one year in ROM (5°), ability to kneel (0.5 points on OKS question), and ascend (1.3 points on OKS question) and descend stairs (0.8 points on OKS question), but these were not greater than the minimal clinically important difference. There were no differences seen in FJS or OKS at one year postoperatively. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups at 24 months in all the variables assessed. Conclusion. FA-RATKA and RA-UKA are both successful treatments for medial compartmental knee arthritis in this study. The UKA group showed a quicker recovery, but this study demonstrated equivalent two-year outcomes in all outcomes measured including stair ascent and descent, and kneeling. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(12):1123–1129

Aims. Robotic arm-assisted surgery offers accurate and reproducible guidance in component positioning and assessment of soft-tissue tensioning during knee arthroplasty, but the feasibility and early outcomes when using this technology for revision surgery remain unknown. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic arm-assisted revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) versus primary robotic arm-assisted TKA at short-term follow-up. Methods. This prospective study included 16 patients undergoing robotic arm-assisted revision of UKA to TKA versus 35 matched patients receiving robotic arm-assisted primary TKA. In all study patients, the following data were recorded: operating time, polyethylene liner size, change in haemoglobin concentration (g/dl), length of inpatient stay, postoperative complications, and hip-knee-ankle (HKA) alignment. All procedures were performed using the principles of functional alignment. At most recent follow-up, range of motion (ROM), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) were collected. Mean follow-up time was 21 months (6 to 36). Results. There were no differences between the two treatment groups with regard to mean change in haemoglobin concentration (p = 0.477), length of stay (LOS, p = 0.172), mean polyethylene thickness (p = 0.065), or postoperative complication rates (p = 0.295). At the most recent follow-up, the primary robotic arm-assisted TKA group had a statistically significantly improved OKS compared with the revision UKA to TKA group (44.6 (SD 2.7) vs 42.3 (SD 2.5); p = 0.004) but there was no difference in the overall ROM (p = 0.056) or FJS between the two treatment groups (86.1 (SD 9.6) vs 84.1 (4.9); p = 0.439). Conclusion. Robotic arm-assisted revision of UKA to TKA was associated with comparable intraoperative blood loss, early postoperative rehabilitation, functional outcomes, and complications to primary robotic TKA at short-term follow-up. Robotic arm-assisted surgery offers a safe and reproducible technique for revising failed UKA to TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):680–687

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(12):1120–1122.

Aims

Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (R-UKA) has been proposed as an approach to improve the results of the conventional manual UKA (C-UKA). The aim of this meta-analysis was to analyze the studies comparing R-UKA and C-UKA in terms of clinical outcomes, radiological results, operating time, complications, and revisions.

Aims

Treatment of end-stage anteromedial osteoarthritis (AMOA) of the knee is commonly approached using one of two surgical strategies: medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In this study we aim to investigate if there is any difference in outcome for patients undergoing UKA or TKA, when treated by high-volume surgeons, in high-volume centres, using two different clinical guidelines. The two strategies are ‘UKA whenever possible’ vs TKA for all patients with AMOA.

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.

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of robotic arm-assisted bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) with conventional mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) during the first six weeks and at one year postoperatively.

Aims. Day-case arthroplasty is gaining popularity in Europe. We report outcomes from the first 12 months following implementation of a day-case pathway for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) in an NHS hospital. Methods. A total of 47 total hip arthroplasty (THA) and 24 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) patients were selected for the day-case arthroplasty pathway, based on preoperative fitness and agreement to participate. Data were likewise collected for a matched control group (n = 58) who followed the standard pathway three months prior to the implementation of the day-case pathway. We report same-day discharge (SDD) success, reasons for delayed discharge, and patient-reported outcomes. Overall length of stay (LOS) for all lower limb arthroplasty was recorded to determine the wider impact of implementing a day-case pathway. Results. Patients on the day-case pathway achieved SDD in 47% (22/47) of THAs and 67% (16/24) of UKAs. The most common reasons for failed SDD were nausea, hypotension, and pain, which were strongly associated with the use of fentanyl in the spinal anaesthetic. Complications and patient-reported outcomes were not significantly different between groups. Following the introduction of the day-case pathway, the mean LOS reduced significantly by 0.7, 0.6, and 0.5 days respectively in THA, UKA, and total knee arthroplasty cases (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Day-case pathways are feasible in an NHS set-up with only small changes required. We do not recommend fentanyl in the spinal anaesthetic for day-case patients. An important benefit seen in our unit is the so-called ‘day-case effect’, with a significant reduction in mean LOS seen across all lower limb arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(11):900–908

Aims. A functional anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) or posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) has been assumed to be required for patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). However, this assumption has not been thoroughly tested. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the biomechanical effects exerted by cruciate ligament-deficient knees with medial UKAs regarding different posterior tibial slopes. Methods. ACL- or PCL-deficient models with posterior tibial slopes of 1°, 3°, 5°, 7°, and 9° were developed and compared to intact models. The kinematics and contact stresses on the tibiofemoral joint were evaluated under gait cycle loading conditions. Results. Anterior translation increased in ACL-deficient UKA cases compared with intact models. In contrast, posterior translation increased in PCL-deficient UKA cases compared with intact models. As the posterior tibial slope increased, anterior translation of ACL-deficient UKA increased significantly in the stance phase, and posterior translation of PCL-deficient UKA increased significantly in the swing phase. Furthermore, as the posterior tibial slope increased, contact stress on the other compartment increased in cruciate ligament-deficient UKAs compared with intact UKAs. Conclusion. Fixed-bearing medial UKA is a viable treatment option for patients with cruciate ligament deficiency, providing a less invasive procedure and allowing patient-specific kinematics to adjust posterior tibial slope. Patient selection is important, and while AP kinematics can be compensated for by posterior tibial slope adjustment, rotational stability is a prerequisite for this approach. ACL- or PCL-deficient UKA that adjusts the posterior tibial slope might be an alternative treatment option for a skilled surgeon. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(7):494–502

Aims. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is the preferred treatment for anterior medial knee osteoarthritis (OA) owing to the rapid postoperative recovery. However, the risk factors for UKA failure remain controversial. Methods. The clinical data of Oxford mobile-bearing UKAs performed between 2011 and 2017 with a minimum follow-up of five years were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic, surgical, and follow-up data were collected. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify the risk factors that contribute to UKA failure. Kaplan-Meier survival was used to compare the effect of the prosthesis position on UKA survival. Results. A total of 407 patients who underwent UKA were included in the study. The mean age of patients was 61.8 years, and the mean follow-up period of the patients was 91.7 months. The mean Knee Society Score (KSS) preoperatively and at the last follow-up were 64.2 and 89.7, respectively (p = 0.001). Overall, 28 patients (6.9%) with UKA underwent revision due to prosthesis loosening (16 patients), dislocation (eight patients), and persistent pain (four patients). Cox proportional hazards model analysis identified malposition of the prostheses as a high-risk factor for UKA failure (p = 0.007). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the five-year survival rate of the group with malposition was 85.1%, which was significantly lower than that of the group with normal position (96.2%; p < 0.001). Conclusion. UKA constitutes an effective method for treating anteromedial knee OA, with an excellent five-year survival rate. Aseptic loosening caused by prosthesis malposition was identified as the main cause of UKA failure. Surgeons should pay close attention to prevent the potential occurrence of this problem. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(12):914–922

Aims. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has a higher risk of revision than total knee arthroplasty (TKA), particularly for younger patients. The outcome of knee arthroplasty is typically defined as implant survival or revision incidence after a defined number of years. This can be difficult for patients to conceptualize. We aimed to calculate the ‘lifetime risk’ of revision for UKA as a more meaningful estimate of risk projection over a patient’s remaining lifetime, and to compare this to TKA. Methods. Incidence of revision and mortality for all primary UKAs performed from 1999 to 2019 (n = 13,481) was obtained from the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR). Lifetime risk of revision was calculated for patients and stratified by age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade. Results. The lifetime risk of revision was highest in the youngest age group (46 to 50 years; 40.4%) and decreased sequentially to the oldest (86 to 90 years; 3.7%). Across all age groups, lifetime risk of revision was higher for females (ranging from 4.3% to 43.4% vs males 2.9% to 37.4%) and patients with a higher ASA grade (ASA 3 to 4, ranging from 8.8% to 41.2% vs ASA 1 1.8% to 29.8%). The lifetime risk of revision for UKA was double that of TKA across all age groups (ranging from 3.7% to 40.4% for UKA, and 1.6% to 22.4% for TKA). The higher risk of revision in younger patients was associated with aseptic loosening in both sexes and pain in females. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) accounted for 4% of all UKA revisions, in contrast with 27% for TKA; the risk of PJI was higher for males than females for both procedures. Conclusion. Lifetime risk of revision may be a more meaningful measure of arthroplasty outcomes than implant survival at defined time periods. This study highlights the higher lifetime risk of UKA revision for younger patients, females, and those with a higher ASA grade, which can aid with patient counselling prior to UKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):672–679

Aims. The aim of this study was to describe the pattern of revision indications for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and any change to this pattern for UKA patients over the last 20 years, and to investigate potential associations to changes in surgical practice over time. Methods. All primary knee arthroplasty surgeries performed due to primary osteoarthritis and their revisions reported to the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Register from 1997 to 2017 were included. Complex surgeries were excluded. The data was linked to the National Patient Register and the Civil Registration System for comorbidity, mortality, and emigration status. TKAs were propensity score matched 4:1 to UKAs. Revision risks were compared using competing risk Cox proportional hazard regression with a shared γ frailty component. Results. Aseptic loosening (loosening) was the most common revision indication for both UKA (26.7%) and TKA (29.5%). Pain and disease progression accounted for 54.6% of the remaining UKA revisions. Infections and instability accounted for 56.1% of the remaining TKA revision. The incidence of revision due to loosening or pain decreased over the last decade, being the second and third least common indications in 2017. There was a decrease associated with fixation method for pain (hazard ratio (HR) 0.40; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.94) and loosening (HR 0.29; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.81) for cementless compared to cemented, and units UKA usage for pain (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.91), and loosening (HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.70) for high usage. Conclusion. The overall revision patterns for UKA and TKA for the last 20 years are comparable to previous published patterns. We found large changes to UKA revision patterns in the last decade, and with the current surgical practice, revision due to pain or loosening are significantly less likely. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(12):923–931

Aims. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented disruption to elective orthopaedic services. The primary objective of this study was to examine changes in functional scores in patients awaiting total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Secondary objectives were to investigate differences between these groups and identify those in a health state ‘worse than death’ (WTD). Methods. In this prospective cohort study, preoperative Oxford hip and knee scores (OHS/OKS) were recorded for patients added to a waiting list for THA, TKA, or UKA, during the initial eight months of the COVID-19 pandemic, and repeated at 14 months into the pandemic (mean interval nine months (SD 2.84)). EuroQoL five-dimension five-level health questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) index scores were also calculated at this point in time, with a negative score representing a state WTD. OHS/OKS were analyzed over time and in relation to the EQ-5D-5L. Results. A total of 174 patients (58 THA, 74 TKA, 42 UKA) were eligible, after 27 were excluded (one died, seven underwent surgery, 19 non-responders). The overall mean OHS/OKS deteriorated from 15.43 (SD 6.92), when patients were added to the waiting list, to 11.77 (SD 6.45) during the pandemic (p < 0.001). There were significantly worse EQ-5D-5L index scores in the THA group (p = 0.005), with 22 of these patients (38%) in a health state WTD, than either the TKA group (20 patients; 27% WTD), or the UKA group (nine patients; 21% WTD). A strong positive correlation between the EQ-5D-5L index score and OHS/OKS was observed (r = 0.818; p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed that an OHS/OKS lower than nine predicted a health state WTD (88% sensitivity and 73% specificity). Conclusion. OHS/OKS deteriorated significantly among patients awaiting lower limb arthroplasty during the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, 51 patients were in a health state WTD, representing 29% of our entire cohort, which is considerably worse than existing pre-pandemic data. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(3):138–145

Aims. While residual fixed flexion deformity (FFD) in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been associated with worse functional outcomes, limited evidence exists regarding FFD changes. The objective of this study was to quantify FFD changes in patients with medial unicompartmental knee arthritis undergoing UKA, and investigate any correlation with clinical outcomes. Methods. This study included 136 patients undergoing robotic arm-assisted medial UKA between January 2018 and December 2022. The study included 75 males (55.1%) and 61 (44.9%) females, with a mean age of 67.1 years (45 to 90). Patients were divided into three study groups based on the degree of preoperative FFD: ≤ 5°, 5° to ≤ 10°, and > 10°. Intraoperative optical motion capture technology was used to assess pre- and postoperative FFD. Clinical FFD was measured pre- and postoperatively at six weeks and one year following surgery. Preoperative and one-year postoperative Oxford Knee Scores (OKS) were collected. Results. Overall, the median preoperative navigated (NAV) FFD measured 6.0° (IQR 3.1 to 8), while the median postoperative NAV FFD was 3.0° (IQR 1° to 4.4°), representing a mean correction of 49.2%. The median preoperative clinical FFD was 5° (IQR 0° to 9.75°) for the entire cohort, which decreased to 3.0° (IQR 0° to 5°) and 2° (IQR 0° to 3°) at six weeks and one year postoperatively, respectively. A statistically significant improvement in PROMs compared with baseline was evident in all groups (p < 0.001). Regression analyses showed that participants who experienced a larger FFD correction, showed greater improvement in PROMs (β = 0.609, p = 0.049; 95% CI 0.002 to 1.216). Conclusion. This study found that UKA was associated with an approximately 50% improvement in preoperative FFD across all three examined groups. Participants with greater correction of FFD also demonstrated larger OKS gains. These findings could prove a useful augment to clinical decision-making regarding candidacy for UKA and anticipated improvements in FFD