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.

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.

Aims

The success of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is usually measured using functional outcome scores and revision-free survivorship. However, reporting the lifetime risk of revision may be more meaningful to patients when gauging risks, especially in younger patients. We aimed to assess the lifetime risk of revision for patients in different age categories at the time of undergoing primary TKA.

Aims

Although total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a highly successful procedure, about 20% of patients remain dissatisfied postoperatively. This proportion is derived from dichotomous models of the assessment of surgical success or failure, which may not reflect the spectrum of outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore differing responses to surgery, and assess whether there are distinct groups of patients with differing patterns of outcome.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to develop a personalized outcome prediction tool, to be used with knee arthroplasty patients, that predicts outcomes (lengths of stay (LOS), 90 day readmission, and one-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) on an individual basis and allows for dynamic modifiable risk factors.

Aims

There are comparatively few randomized studies evaluating knee arthroplasty prostheses, and fewer still that report longer-term functional outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate mid-term outcomes of an existing implant trial cohort to document changing patient function over time following total knee arthroplasty using longitudinal analytical techniques and to determine whether implant design chosen at time of surgery influenced these outcomes.

Aims

The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Instability is a common indication for early revision after both primary and revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA), accounting for up to 20% in the literature. The number of TKAs performed annually continues to climb exponentially, thus having an effective algorithm for treatment is essential. This relies on a thorough pre- and intra-operative assessment of the patient. The underlying cause of the instability must be identified initially and subsequently, the surgeon must be able to balance the flexion and extension gaps and be comfortable using a variety of constrained implants.

This review describes the assessment of the unstable TKA, and the authors’ preferred form of treatment for these difficult cases where the source of instability is often multifactorial.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):116–19.

Although the vast majority of patients that undergo total knee replacement have satisfactory outcomes with a generally low complication rate, occasionally a patient will be encountered that has had multiple failed surgeries, and now reaches a crossroad as to whether limb salvage will be acceptable or not.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):122–4.

The aim of this prospective multicentre study was to report the patient satisfaction after total knee replacement (TKR), undertaken with the aid of intra-operative sensors, and to compare these results with previous studies. A total of 135 patients undergoing TKR were included in the study. The soft-tissue balance of each TKR was quantified intra-operatively by the sensor, and 18 (13%) were found to be unbalanced. A total of 113 patients (96.7%) in the balanced group and 15 (82.1%) in the unbalanced group were satisfied or very satisfied one year post-operatively (p = 0.043).

A review of the literature identified no previous study with a mean level of satisfaction that was greater than the reported level of satisfaction of the balanced TKR group in this study. Ensuring soft-tissue balance by using intra-operative sensors during TKR may improve satisfaction.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1333–8

We have previously reported the short-term radiological results of a randomised controlled trial comparing kinematically aligned total knee replacement (TKR) and mechanically aligned TKR, along with early pain and function scores. In this study we report the two-year clinical results from this trial. A total of 88 patients (88 knees) were randomly allocated to undergo either kinematically aligned TKR using patient-specific guides, or mechanically aligned TKR using conventional instruments. They were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The patients and the clinical evaluator were blinded to the method of alignment.

At a minimum of two years, all outcomes were better for the kinematically aligned group, as determined by the mean Oxford knee score (40 (15 to 48) versus 33 (13 to 48); p = 0.005), the mean Western Ontario McMaster Universities Arthritis index (WOMAC) (15 (0 to 63) versus 26 (0 to 73); p = 0.005), mean combined Knee Society score (160 (93 to 200) versus 137 (64 to 200); p= 0.005) and mean flexion of 121° (100 to 150) versus 113° (80 to 130) (p = 0.002). The odds ratio of having a pain-free knee at two years with the kinematically aligned technique (Oxford and WOMAC pain scores) was 3.2 (p = 0.020) and 4.9 (p = 0.001), respectively, compared with the mechanically aligned technique. Patients in the kinematically aligned group walked a mean of 50 feet further in hospital prior to discharge compared with the mechanically aligned group (p = 0.044).

In this study, the use of a kinematic alignment technique performed with patient-specific guides provided better pain relief and restored better function and range of movement than the mechanical alignment technique performed with conventional instruments.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:907–13.

We studied the bone mineral density (BMD) and the bone mineral content (BMC) of the proximal tibia in patients with a well-functioning uncemented Oxford medial compartment arthroplasty using the Lunar iDXA bone densitometer. Our hypothesis was that there would be decreased BMD and BMC adjacent to the tibial base plate and increased BMD and BMC at the tip of the keel.

There were 79 consecutive patients (33 men, 46 women) with a mean age of 65 years (44 to 84) with a minimum two-year follow-up (mean 2.6 years (2.0 to 5.0)) after unilateral arthroplasty, who were scanned using a validated standard protocol where seven regions of interest (ROI) were examined and compared with the contralateral normal knee. All had well-functioning knees with a mean Oxford knee score of 43 (14 to 48) and mean Knee Society function score of 90 (20 to 100), showing a correlation with the increasing scores and higher BMC and BMD values in ROI 2 in the non-implanted knee relative to the implanted knee (p = 0.013 and p = 0.015, respectively).

The absolute and percentage changes in BMD and BMC were decreased in all ROIs in the implanted knee compared with the non-implanted knee, but this did not reach statistical significance. Bone loss was markedly less than reported losses with total knee replacement.

There was no significant association with side, although there was a tendency for the BMC to decrease with age in men. The BMC was less in the implanted side relative to the non-implanted side in men compared with women in ROI 2 (p = 0.027), ROI 3 (p = 0.049) and ROI 4 (p = 0.029).

The uncemented Oxford medial compartment arthroplasty appears to allow relative preservation of the BMC and BMD of the proximal tibia, suggesting that the implant acts more physiologically than total knee replacement. Peri-prosthetic bone loss is an important factor in assessing long-term implant stability and survival, and the results of this study are encouraging for the long-term outcome of this arthroplasty.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1480–3.

The Cementless Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (OUKR) was developed to address problems related to cementation, and has been demonstrated in a randomised study to have similar clinical outcomes with fewer radiolucencies than observed with the cemented device. However, before its widespread use it is necessary to clarify contraindications and assess the complications. This requires a larger study than any previously published.

We present a prospective multicentre series of 1000 cementless OUKRs in 881 patients at a minimum follow-up of one year. All patients had radiological assessment aligned to the bone–implant interfaces and clinical scores. Analysis was performed at a mean of 38.2 months (19 to 88) following surgery. A total of 17 patients died (comprising 19 knees (1.9%)), none as a result of surgery; there were no tibial or femoral loosenings. A total of 19 knees (1.9%) had significant implant-related complications or required revision. Implant survival at six years was 97.2%, and there was a partial radiolucency at the bone–implant interface in 72 knees (8.9%), with no complete radiolucencies. There was no significant increase in complication rate compared with cemented fixation (p = 0.87), and no specific contraindications to cementless fixation were identified.

Cementless OUKR appears to be safe and reproducible in patients with end-stage anteromedial osteoarthritis of the knee, with radiological evidence of improved fixation compared with previous reports using cemented fixation.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:181–7.

We carried out a prospective investigation into the radiological outcomes of uncemented Oxford medial compartment unicondylar replacement in 220 consecutive patients (231 knees) performed in a single centre with a minimum two-year follow-up. The functional outcomes using the mean Oxford knee score and the mean high-activity arthroplasty score were significantly improved over the pre-operative scores (p < 0.001). There were 196 patients with a two-year radiological examination performed under fluoroscopic guidance, aiming to provide images acceptable for analysis of the bone–implant interface. Of the six tibial zones examined on each knee on the anteroposterior radiograph, only three had a partial radiolucent line. All were in the medial aspect of the tibial base plate (zone 1) and all measured < 1 mm. All of these patients were asymptomatic. There were no radiolucent lines seen around the femoral component or on the lateral view. There was one revision for loosening at one year due to initial inadequate seating of the tibial component. These results confirm that the early uncemented Oxford medial unicompartmental compartmental knee replacements were reliable and the incidence of radiolucent lines was significantly decreased compared with the reported results of cemented versions of this implant. These independent results confirm those of the designing centre.

We reviewed the rate of revision of unicompartmental knee replacements (UKR) from the New Zealand Joint Registry between 1999 and 2008. There were 4284 UKRs, of which 236 required revision, 205 to a total knee replacement (U2T) and 31 to a further unicompartmental knee replacement (U2U). We used these data to establish whether the survival and functional outcome for revised UKRs were comparable with those of primary total knee replacement (TKR). The rate of revision for the U2T cohort was four times higher than that for a primary TKR (1.97 vs 0.48; p < 0.05). The mean Oxford Knee Score was also significantly worse in the U2T group than that of the primary TKR group (30.02 vs 37.16; p < 0.01). The rate of revision for conversion of a failed UKR to a further UKR (U2U cohort) was 13 times higher than that for a primary TKR.

The poor outcome of a UKR converted to a primary TKR compared with a primary TKR should contra-indicate the use of a UKR as a more conservative procedure in the younger patient.