Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patient-Specific Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Minimally Invasive Surgery in Orthopedics

  • 90 Accesses

Abstract

The purpose of the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is to correct deformity, restore stability, and relieve pain. Precise patient selection is crucial to the success of the operation. In order for the UKA to be beneficial postoperatively, the patient should have unicompartmental tree disease and mild, if any, deformities of the ice preoperatively. The patient should also not have inflammatory arthritis of instability. Proper operative technique is also imperative for postoperative results. Correct alignment and minimal bone resection are critical for the outcome of the surgery. Some of the major complications with UKAs are osteoarthritis disease progression, too much bone out, malalignment, and tibial fractures. Patient-specific instrumentation is advantageous for the UKA because it provides a guide specific for that patient’s anatomy. The guide has been shown to improve accuracy and reliability of implant positioning and thus increase survivorship while minimizing complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 899.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 1,199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. MacIntosh DL. Hemiarthroplasty of the knee using a space occupying prosthesis for painful varus and valgus deformity. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1958;40:1431.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Campbell WC. Interposition of vitallium plates in arthroplasties of the knee: preliminary report. Am J Surg. 1940;47:639–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Gunston FH. Polycentric knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 1971;53:272–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Riddle DL, Jiranek WA, McGlynn FJ. Yearly incidence of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the United States. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23(3):408–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ackroyd CE. Medial compartment arthroplasty of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 2003;85(7):937–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Plate JF, Augart MA, Seyler TM, Bracey DN, Hoggard A, Akbar M, Jinnah RH, Poehling GG. Obesity has no effect on outcomes following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015; doi:10.1007/500167–015–3597–5.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bonutti PM, Goddard MS, Zywiel MG, Khanuja HS, Johnson AJ, Mont MA. Outcomes of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty stratified by body mass index. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26(8):1149–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Berend KR, Lombardi Jr AV, Mallory TH, Adams JB, Groseth KL. Early failure of minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is associated with obesity. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;440:60–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bert JM. Unicompartmental knee replacement. Orthop Clin N Am. 2005;36(4):513–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Heck DA, Marmor L, Gibson A, Rougraff BT. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A multicenter investigation with long-term follow-up evaluation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993;286:154–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kandil A, Werner BC, Gwathmey WF, Browne JA. Obesity, morbid obesity and their related medical comorbidities are associated with increased complications and revision rates after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2015;30(3):456–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cavaignac E, Lafontan V, Reina N, Pailhe R, Wargny M, Laffosse JM, Chiron P. Obesity has no adverse effect on the outcome of unicompartmental knee replacement at a minimum follow-up of seven years. Bone Joint J. 2013;95-B(8):1064–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Murray DW, Pandit H, Weston-Simons JS, Jenkins C, Gill HS, Lombardi AV, Dodd CA, Berend KR. Does body mass index affect the outcome of unicompartmental knee replacement? Knee. 2013;20(6):461–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Price AJ, Waite JC, Svard U. Long-term clinical results of the medial Oxford unicompartmental knee arhtroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;435:171–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Squire MW, Callaghan JJ, Goetz DD, et al. Unicompartmental knee replacement: a minimum of 15 follow-up study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999;367:61–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Berger RA, Menghini RM, Sheinkop MB, et al. The progression of patellofemoral arthrosis after medial unicompartmental replacement: results at 11 to 15 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;428:92–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ. The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 1998;80:983–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Aleto TJ, Berend ME, Ritter MA, et al. Early failure of unicompartmenal knee arthroplasty leading to revision. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:159–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Berger R, Meneghini R, Jacobs J, et al. Results of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years of follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:999–1004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hernigou P, Deschamps G. Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;423:161–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hernigou P, Deschamps G. Patellar impingment following unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:1132–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bloebaum R, Bachus K, Mitchell W, et al. Analysis of the bone surface area in resected tibia. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;309:2–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Van Loon P, de Munnynck B, Bellemens J. Peri-prosthetic fracture of the tibial plateau after uni-compartmental knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Belg. 2006;72:369–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yang KY, Yeo SJ, Lo NN. Stress fracture of the medial tibial plateau after minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a report of 2 case. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:801–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Brumby S, Carrington R, Zayontz S, et al. Tibial plateau stress fracture: a complication of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using 4 guide pinholes. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:809–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Song M, Kim B, Seong J, et al. Early complications after minimally invasive mobile-bearing unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:1281–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Seon JK, Song EK, Yoon TR, et al. Tibial plateau stress fracture after unicondylar knee arthroplasty using a navigation system: two case reports. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2007;15:67–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bell SW, Soddard J, Bennett C, London N. Accuracy and early outcomes in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty performed using patient specific instrumentation. Knee. 2014;21(1):S33–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Fitz W. Unicompartmental knee arthoplasty with use of novel patient-specific resurfacing implants and personalized jigs. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(1):69–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Koeck FX, Beckman J, Luring C, Rath B, Grifka J, Basad E. Evaluation of implant position and knee alignment after patient-specific unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2011;18:294–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Volpi P, Prospero E, Ait C, Cervellin M, Quaglia A, Redaelli A, Denti M. High accuracy in knee alignment and implant placement in unicompartmental medial knee replacement when using patient-specific instrumentation. Knee. 2015;23:1292–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Demange MK, Von Keudell A, Probst C, Yoshioka H, Gomoll AH. Patient-specific implants for lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2015;39(8):1519–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Northwell Health Orthopaedic Institute, New York, NY, 10065, USA

    Fred Cushner & Jamie M. Grossman

Authors
  1. Fred Cushner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jamie M. Grossman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fred Cushner .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopedic Service Line, Northwell Health , New York, New York, USA

    Giles R. Scuderi

  2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rutgers-Robert Wood JohnsonMedicalSchool Department of Orthopedic Surgery, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA

    Alfred J. Tria

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this entry

Cite this entry

Cushner, F., Grossman, J.M. (2016). Patient-Specific Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty. In: Scuderi, G., Tria, A. (eds) Minimally Invasive Surgery in Orthopedics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-34109-5_120

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-34109-5_120

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-34107-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-34109-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineReference Module Medicine

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation