Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty in the Young Patient

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Management of Knee Osteoarthritis in the Younger, Active Patient

  • 1981 Accesses

Abstract

Historically, advances in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with regard to implant design and surgical technique have resulted in improved clinical outcomes and survivorship [1]. Despite the functional advantages of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), advances in clinical outcomes and survivorship continue to be somewhat limited [2–5]. Proponents of UKA cite multiple advantages of UKA over TKA. These include accelerated patient rehabilitation and recovery, less blood loss, lower morbidity, and preservation of normal knee kinematics [6].

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
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. Palumbo BT, Scott RD. Diagnosis and indications for treatment of unicompartmental arthritis. Clin Sports Med. 2014;33(02785919):11–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Koskinen E, Paavolainen P, Eskelinen A, Pulkkinen P, Remes V. Unicondylar knee replacement for primary osteoarthritis: a prospective follow-up study of 1,819 patients from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop. 2007;78:128–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. W-Dahl A, Robertsson O, Lidgren L, Miller L, Davidson D, Graves S. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients aged less than 65: combined data from the Australian and Swedish Knee Registries. Acta Orthop [En ligne]. 2010;81:90–4. Disponible: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-77950473777&partnerID=40&md5=6ecfab0a58ab4761ac1cb85747efee61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Pearse AJ, Hooper GJ, Rothwell A, Frampton C. Survival and functional outcome after revision of a unicompartmental to a total knee replacement: the New Zealand National Joint Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92(4):508–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Baker PN, Petheram T, Avery PJ, Gregg PJ, Deehan DJ. Revision for unexplained pain following unicompartmental and total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94:e126.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Laurencin CT, Zelicof SB, Scott RD, Ewald FC. Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty in the same patient. A comparative study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;273:151–6.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Biswas D, Van Thiel GS, Wetters NG, Pack BJ, Berger RA, Della Valle CJ. Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients less than 55 years old: minimum of two years of follow-up. J Arthroplasty [En ligne]. Elsevier Inc.; 2014;29(1):101–5. Disponible: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2013.04.046.

  8. Saccomanni B. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a review of literature. Clin Rheumatol. 2010;29(4):339–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. [En ligne]. Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register Annual Report. 2014 [cité le 23 mai 2015]. Disponible: http://myknee.se/pdf/SKAR2014_Eng_1.1.pdf.

  10. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report [En ligne]. Adelaide: AOA. 2014. Disponible: https://aoanjrr.dmac.adelaide.edu.au/documents/10180/172286/Annual. Report 2014.

  11. Wishart N, Beaumont R, Young E, Mccormack V, Swanson M. National Joint Registry for England, Wales and Northern Ireland: 11th Annual Report [En ligne]. 2014. Disponible: http://www.njrcentre.org.uk/njrcentre/Portals/0/Documents/England/Reports/11th_annual_report/NJR. 11th Annual Report 2014.pdf.

  12. Rothwell A, Larmer P, Hobbs T, Rothwell A. The New Zealand Joint Registry Annual Report Editorial Committee. 2014. Disponible: http://www.nzoa.org.nz/system/files/NZJR2014Report.pdf.

  13. Borus T, Thornhill T. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008;16:9–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Journal T, Vol A, Schai A, Scott D. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in middle – aged patients a 2- to 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Anthroplasty. 1998;13(4):365–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Deshmukh RV, Scott RD. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for younger patients: an alternative view. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;(404):108–12.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mariani EM, Bourne MH, Jackson RT, Jackson ST, Jones P. Recalled-early failure of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22(6):81–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fehring TK, Odum SM, Masonis JL, Springer BD. Early failures in unicondylar arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2010;33:11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kozinn SC, Scott R. Unicondylar knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71(I):145–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Felts E, Parratte S, Pauly V, Aubaniac J-M, Argenson J-N. Function and quality of life following medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients 60 years of age or younger. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res [En ligne]. 2010;96(8):861–7. Disponible: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877056810002057.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Berger RA, Meneghini RM, Jacobs JJ, Sheinkop MB, Della Valle CJ, Rosenberg AG, et al. Results of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years of follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am [En ligne]. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. 2005 [cité le 28 févr 2015];87(5):999–1006. Disponible: http://jbjs.org/content/87/5/999.abstract.

  21. Murray DW, Pandit H, Weston-Simons JS, Jenkins C, Gill HS, Lombardia V, et al. Does body mass index affect the outcome of unicompartmental knee replacement? Knee [En ligne]. 2012;20(6):461–5. Disponible: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23110877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Broughton NS, Newman JH, Baily RA. Unicompartmental replacement and high tibial osteotomy for osteoarthritis of the knee. A comparative study after 5–10 years’ follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1986;68:447–52.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Psychoyios V, Crawford RW, O’Connor JJ, Murray DW. Wear of congruent meniscal bearings in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a retrieval study of 16 specimens. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:976–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Munk B, Frøkjaer J. A 10-year follow-up of unicompartmental arthrosis treated with the Marmor method. Ugeskr Laeger. 1994;156:4029–31.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Price AJ, Dodd CAF, Svard UGC, Murray DW. Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients younger and older than 60 years of age. J Bone Jt Surg Br [En ligne]. 2005;87:1488–92. Disponible: C:\Users\Public\Documents\10 PubMed Literatur\2005\JBJS-B\Price2005b - Oxford medial UKA in patients younger and older than 60 years.pdf.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Niinimäki TT, Murray DW, Partanen J, Pajala A, Leppilahti JI. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasties implanted for osteoarthritis with partial loss of joint space have high re-operation rates. Knee. 2011;18:432–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Pennington DW, Swienckowski JJ, Lutes WB, Drake GN. Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: survivorship and technical considerations at an average follow-up of 12.4 years. J Arthroplasty [En ligne]. 2006 [cité le 24 janv 2015];21(1):13–7. Disponible: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883540305001336.

  28. Smith JRA, Robinson JR, Porteous AJ, Murray JRD, Hassaballa MA, Artz N, et al. The knee fixed bearing lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty — short to midterm survivorship and knee scores for 101 prostheses. Knee [En ligne]. Elsevier B.V.; 2014;21(4):843–7. Disponible: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2014.04.003.

  29. Lonner JH. Patellofemoral arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007;15(8):495–506.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Suggs JF, Li G, Park SE, Steffensmeier S, Rubash HE, Freiberg AA. Function of the anterior cruciate ligament after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: an in vitro robotic study. J Arthroplasty. 2004;19:224–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Argenson J-NA, Komistek RD, Aubaniac J-M, Dennis DA, Northcut EJ, Anderson DT, et al. In vivo determination of knee kinematics for subjects implanted with a unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17:1049–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Christensen NO. Unicompartmental prosthesis for gonarthrosis. A nine-year series of 575 knees from a Swedish hospital. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;165–9.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hernigou P, Deschamps G. Posterior slope of the tibial implant and the outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A:506–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cartier P, Sanouiller JL, Grelsamer RP. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty surgery. 10-year minimum follow-up period. J Arthroplasty. 1996;11(7):782–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Pennington DW, Swienckowski JJ, Lutes WB, Drake GN, Pennington DW. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients sixty years of age or younger. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A:1968–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Weston-Simons JS, Pandit H, Jenkins C, Jackson WFM, Price AJ, Gill HS, et al. Outcome of combined unicompartmental knee replacement and combined or sequential anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a study of 52 cases with mean follow-up of five years. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94:1216–20. Disponible: http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.94B9.28881.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Emerson RH, Hansborough T, Reitman RD, Rosenfeldt W, Higgins LL. Comparison of a mobile with a fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee implant. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;62–70.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Kendrick BJL, Longino D, Pandit H, Svard U, Gill HS, Dodd CAF, et al. Polyethylene wear in Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement: a retrieval study of 47 bearings. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92(3):367–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Gunther TV, Murray DW, Miller R, Wallace DA, Carr AJ, O’Connor JJ, et al. Lateral unicompartmental arthroplasty with the Oxford meniscal knee. Knee [En ligne]. Elsevier; 1996 [cité le 28 févr 2015];3(1–2):33–9. Disponible: http://www.thekneejournal.com/article/0968016096002086/fulltext.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kim S-J, Postigo R, Koo S, Kim JH. Causes of revision following Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sport Traumatol Arthrosc [En ligne]. 2013;22(8):1895–901. Disponible: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00167-013-2644-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Argenson J-NA, Blanc G, Aubaniac J-M, Parratte S. Modern unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with cement: a concise follow-up, at a mean of twenty years, of a previous report. J Bone Joint Surg Am [En ligne]. 2013;95:905–9. Disponible: http://jbjs.org/article.aspx?articleid=1686214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Pandit H, Jenkins C, Gill HS, Smith G, Price AJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW, et al. Unnecessary contraindications for mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:622–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Price AJ, Orth F, Waite JC, Svard U. Long-term clinical results of the medial Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;171–80.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Whittaker JP, Naudie DDR, McAuley JP, McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ, Bourne RB. Does bearing design influence midterm survivorship of unicompartmental arthroplasty? Dans: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(1):73–81.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Parratte S, Pauly V, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JNA. No long-term difference between fixed and mobile medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Dans: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(1):61–8.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Confalonieri N, Manzotti A, Pullen C. Comparison of a mobile with a fixed tibial bearing unicompartimental knee prosthesis: a prospective randomized trial using a dedicated outcome score. Knee. 2004;11:357–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Thompson SAJ, Liabaud B, Nellans KW, Geller JA. Factors associated with poor outcomes following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: redefining the “classic” indications for surgery. J Arthroplasty [En ligne]. Elsevier Inc.; 2013;28(9):1561–4. Disponible: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883540313002052.

  48. Robertsson O, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L. The routine of surgical management reduces failure after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83(1):45–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Heyse TJ, Khefacha A, Peersman G, Cartier P. Survivorship of UKA in the middle-aged. Knee [En ligne]. Elsevier; 2012 [cité le 28 févr 2015];19(5):585–91. Disponible: http://www.thekneejournal.com/article/S0968016011001645/fulltext.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Parratte S, Argenson JN, Pearce O, Pauly V, Auquier P, Aubaniac JM. Medial unicompartmental knee replacement in the under-50s. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91(3):351–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Cartier P, Khefacha A, Sanouiller J-L, Frederick K. Unicondylar knee arthroplasty in middle-aged patients: a minimum 5-year follow-up. Orthopedics. 2007;30:62–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Schai PA, Suh JT, Thornhill TS, Scott RD. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in middle-aged patients: a 2- to 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty. 1998;13:365–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Dalury D, Kelley TC, Adams MJ. Medial UKA: favorable mid-term results in middle-aged patients. J Knee Surg. 2013;26(2):133–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. McAlindon TE, Snow S, Cooper C, Dieppe PA. Radiographic patterns of osteoarthritis of the knee joint in the community: the importance of the patellofemoral joint. Ann Rheum Dis [En ligne]. 1992 [cité le 28 févr 2015];51(7):844–9. Disponible: http://ard.bmj.com/cgi/content/long/51/7/844.

  55. Scott RD. Lateral unicompartmental replacement: a road less traveled. Orthopedics. 2005;28:983–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Sah AP, Scott RD. Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty through a medial approach. Study with an average five-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am [En ligne]. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.; 2007 [cité le 27 févr 2015];89(9):1948–54. Disponible: http://jbjs.org/content/89/9/1948.abstract.

  57. Argenson JNA, Parratte S, Bertani A, Flecher X, Aubaniac JM. Long-term results with a lateral unicondylar replacement. Dans: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 2008;466(11):2686–93.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Lustig S, Elguindy A, Servien E, Fary C, Munini E, Demey G, et al. 5- to 16-year follow-up of 54 consecutive lateral unicondylar knee arthroplasties with a fixed-all polyethylene bearing. J Arthroplasty [En ligne]. Elsevier Inc.; 2011 [cité le 28 févr 2015];26(8):1318–25. Disponible: http://www.arthroplastyjournal.org/article/S0883540311000398/fulltext.

  59. Baker PN, Jameson SS, Deehan DJ, Gregg PJ, Porter M, Tucker K. Mid-term equivalent survival of medial and lateral unicondylar knee replacement: an analysis of data from a National Joint Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br [En ligne]. 2012;94(12):1641–8. Disponible: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23188905.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Leadbetter WB. Patellofemoral arthroplasty in the treatment of patellofemoral arthritis: rationale and outcomes in younger patients. Orthop Clin North Am. 2008;39:363–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Newman JH. Patellofemoral arthritis and its management with isolated patellofemoral replacement: a personal experience. Orthopedics. 2007;30:58–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Naal FD, Fischer M, Preuss A, Goldhahn J, von Knoch F, Preiss S, et al. Return to sports and recreational activity after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35(10):1688–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Bollars P, Bosquet M, Vandekerckhove B, Hardeman F, Bellemans J. Prosthetic inlay resurfacing for the treatment of focal, full thickness cartilage defects of the femoral condyle: a bridge between biologics and conventional arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sport Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20(9):1753–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Becher C, Kalbe C, Thermann H, Paessler HH, Laprell H, Kaiser T, et al. Minimum 5-year results of focal articular prosthetic resurfacing for the treatment of full-thickness articular cartilage defects in the knee. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2011;131(8):1135–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Imhoff AB, Feucht MJ, Meidinger G, Schöttle PB, Cotic M. Prospective evaluation of anatomic patellofemoral inlay resurfacing: clinical, radiographic, and sports-related results after 24 months. Knee Surg, Sport Traumatol Arthrosc [En ligne]. 2013;23(5):1299–307. Disponible: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00167-013-2786-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Palumbo BT, Henderson ER, Edwards PK, Burris RB, Gutiérrez S, Raterman SJ. Initial experience of the journey-deuce bicompartmental knee prosthesis: a review of 36 cases. J Arthroplasty [En ligne]. Elsevier Inc.; 2011;26(Suppl 6):40–5. Disponible: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2011.03.026.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Morrison TA, Nyce JD, Macaulay WB, Geller JA. Early adverse results with bicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort comparison to total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26 Suppl 6:35–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Craik JD, El Shafie SA, Singh VK, Twyman RS. Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty [En ligne]. Elsevier; 2014 [cité le 28 févr 2015];30(4):592–4. Disponible: http://www.arthroplastyjournal.org/article/S0883540314008274/fulltext

  69. Argenson J-NA, Parratte S. The unicompartmental knee: design and technical considerations in minimizing wear. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;452:137–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Levine WN, Ozuna RM, Scott RD, Thornhill TS. Conversion of failed modern unicompartmental arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1996;11(7):797–801.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Chakrabarty G, Newman JH, Ackroyd CE. Revision of unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee: clinical and technical considerations. J Arthroplasty. 1998;13(2):191–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Becher C, Huber R, Thermann H, Tibesku CO, von Skrbensky G. Tibiofemoral contact mechanics with a femoral resurfacing prosthesis and a non-functional meniscus. Clin Biomech. 2009;24(8):648–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, St. Anthony Hospital, Oklahoma City, OK, USA

    Travis Loidolt DO, MBA

  2. Ortho Carolina, Charlotte, NC, USA

    Brian Curtin MD

Authors
  1. Travis Loidolt DO, MBA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brian Curtin MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brian Curtin MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Sydney Orthopaedic Research Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    David Parker

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 ISAKOS

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Loidolt, T., Curtin, B. (2016). Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty in the Young Patient. In: Parker, D. (eds) Management of Knee Osteoarthritis in the Younger, Active Patient. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48530-9_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48530-9_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-48528-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-48530-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation