Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

, Volume 24, Issue 10, pp 3191–3193 | Cite as

Medial femoral condyle fracture as an intraoperative complication of Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement

  • Bart ten Brinke
  • Laurens J. de Haan
  • Koen L. M. Koenraadt
  • Rutger C. I. van Geenen
Knee
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement (OUKR) is associated with a low perioperative complication rate. This case report describes a periprosthetic fracture of the medial femoral condyle that occurred during an OUKR. The patient was treated with a non-weight-bearing long leg cast for 6 weeks. Afterwards, the fracture had healed, and 3 months postoperatively, there was a full range of motion. Factors leading to this complication could be the impaction force or direction, or a diminished load resistance of the distal femur. Minimally displaced coronal periprosthetic fractures after OUKR can be managed conservatively without residual functional impairment.

Level of evidence

Case report, Level IV.

Keywords

Unicompartmental knee replacement Complication Knee arthroplasty Conservative treatment 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Mr. J.P. de Goffau who made the illustrations of this manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Akan B, Yildirim T, Karaguven D (2013) Medial femoral condyle fracture after cementless unicompartmental knee replacement: a rare complication. Knee 20(4):295–297CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arastu MH, Kokke MC, Duffy PJ, Korley REC, Buckley RE (2013) Coronal plane partial articular fractures of the distal femoral condyle current concepts in management. Bone Joint J 95(9):1165–1171CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baker P, Jameson S, Critchley R, Reed M, Gregg P, Deehan D (2013) Center and surgeon volume influence the revision rate following unicondylar knee replacement: an analysis of 23,400 medial cemented unicondylar knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95(8):702–709CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dervin GF, Carruthers C, Feibel RJ, Biachino AA, Kim PR, Thurston PR (2011) Initial experience with the oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 26(2):192–197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Faour-Martín O, Valverde-García JA, Martín-Ferrero MA, Vega-Castrillo A, de la Red Gallego MA, Suárez de Puga CC, Amigo-Liñares L (2013) Oxford phase 3 unicondylar knee arthroplasty through a minimally invasive approach: long-term results. Int Orthop 37(5):833–838CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim KT, Lee S, Park HS, Cho KH, Kim KS (2007) A prospective analysis of Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 30(5):15–18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim KT, Lee S, Cho KH, Kim KS (2009) Fracture of the medial femoral condyle after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 24(7):1143CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lewis SL, Pozo JL, Muirhead-Allwood WF (1989) Coronal fractures of the lateral femoral condyle. J Bone Joint Surg Br 71(1):118–120PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lim HC, Bae JH, Song SH, Kim SJ (2012) Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement in Korean patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 94(8):1071–1076CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Morris MJ, Molli RG, Berend KR, Lombardi AV Jr (2013) Mortality and perioperative complications after unicomparmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 20(3):218–220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ (1998) The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80(6):983–989CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Murray DW (2005) Mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacement. Orthopedics 28(9):985–987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pandit H, Murray DW, Dodd CA, Deo S, Waite J, Goodfellow J, Gibbons CL (2007) Medial tibial plateau fracture and the Oxford unicompartmental knee. Orthopedics. 30(5):28–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Price AJ, Waite JC, Svard U (2005) Long-term clinical results of the medial Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 435:171–180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Svard UC, Price AJ (2001) Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A survival analysis of an independent series. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83(2):191–194CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bart ten Brinke
    • 1
  • Laurens J. de Haan
    • 1
  • Koen L. M. Koenraadt
    • 2
  • Rutger C. I. van Geenen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryAmphia ZiekenhuisBredaNetherlands
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopedic Knowledge CenterAmphia ZiekenhuisBredaNetherlands

Personalised recommendations