Satisfactory outcomes following combined unicompartmental knee replacement and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Knee
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Purpose

There exist limited options for treatment of patients with combined medial compartment arthritis and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficiency. Ideal treatment is one that offers lasting relief of symptoms not compromising any future surgery. Unicompartmental knee replacement has shown consistently good results in the relatively young and active population, but there is a high reported incidence of failure up to 20%, if performed in ACL-deficient knees. One of the recognized treatment modality is combined ACL reconstruction and unicompartmental arthroplasty. A systematic review was conducted looking at the demographics, techniques, complications and outcome of combined ACL reconstruction with unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Methods

A systematic literature search within the online Medline, PubMed Database, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane and Google Scholar was carried out until October 2016 to identify relevant articles. A study was defined eligible if it met the following inclusion criteria: the surgical procedure combined unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; patient’s clinical and/or functional outcomes were reported; any complications intra-operatively and post-operatively were reported; and the full-text articles, written in English, German, Italian, Dutch or Spanish, were available. Quality and risk of bias assessments were done using standardized criteria set.

Results

A total of 8 studies met the inclusion criteria encompassing 186 patients who were treated with simultaneous ACL reconstruction and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. The mean age was 50.5 years (range from 44 to 56) with a mean follow-up of 37.6 months (range from 24 to 60). There was an improvement in mean Oxford Score from 27.5 to 36.8. Complications reported included tibial inlay dislocation (n = 3), conversion to a total knee arthroplasty (n = 1), infection requiring two-stage revision (n = 2), deep-vein thrombosis (n = 1), stiffness requiring manipulation under anaesthesia (n = 1), retropatellar pain requiring arthroscopic adhesiolysis (n = 1).

Conclusion

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty combined with ACL reconstruction can be a valid treatment option for selected patients, with combined medial unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis and ACL deficiency.

Level of evidence

Systematic Review of Level IV Studies, Level IV.

Keywords

Unicompartmental knee replacement Anterior cruciate ligament Knee arthroplasty Partial knee replacement 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Funding

No funding was required.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

No informed consent.

Supplementary material

167_2017_4536_MOESM1_ESM.jpg (63 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (JPEG 63 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Allum RL, Fergusson CM, Thomas NP (2000) Management of the young 
patient with an osteoarthritic knee. In: Clinical challenges in orthopaedics: the knee London: Martin Dunitz Ltd 1–12Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berger RA, Nedeff DD, Barden RM (1999) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clinical experience at 6- to 10-year follow-up. Clin Orthop Relat Res 367:50–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D’Amico R et al (2003) Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess 27:iii–x, 1–173Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dervin GF, Conway AF, Thurston P (2007) Combined anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: surgical technique. Orthopedics 30:39–42PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deschamps G, Lapeyre B (1987) A review of 79 Lotus prostheses with a follow-up of more than 5 years. Revue de Chirurgie Orth 73:544–551Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Diduch DR, Insall JN, Scott WN, Scuderi GR, Font-Rodriguez D (1997) Total knee replacement in young, active patients: long-term follow-up and functional outcome. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 79-A:575–582Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goodfellow J, O’Connor J (1992) The anterior cruciate ligament in knee arthroplasty: a risk-factor with unconstrained meniscal prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 276:245–252Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goodfellow JW, Kershaw CJ, Benson MK, O’Connor JJ (1988) The Oxford Knee for unicompartmental osteoarthritis: the first 103 cases. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 70:692–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2004) Posterior slope of the tibial implant and the outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A:506–511CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krishnan SRSR, Randle R (2009) ACL reconstruction with uni-condylar replacement in knee with functional instability and osteoarthritis. J Orthop Surg Res 4:43CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Latterman C, Jakob RP (1996) High tibial osteotomy alone or combined with ligament reconstruction in anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 4:32–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Laurencin CT, Zelicof SB, Scott RD, Ewald FC (1991) Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty in the same patient: a comparative study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 273:157–164Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee YS, Jeong YM, Sim JA, Kwak JH, Kim KH, Nam SW et al (2013) Specific compartmental analysis of cartilage status in double-bundle ACL reconstruction patients: a comparative study using pre- and postoperative MR images. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:702–707CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li Y, Zhang H, Zhang J, Li X, Song G, Feng H (2015) Clinical outcome of simultaneous high tibial osteotomy and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction for medial compartment osteoarthritis in young patients with anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees: a systematic review. Arthroscopy 31:507–519CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mahfouz MR, Komistek RD, Dennis DA, Hoff WA (2004) In vivo assessment of the kinematics in normal and anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86A(Suppl 2):56–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Malmivaara A, Koes BW, Bouter LM, van Tulder MW (2006) Applicability and clinical relevance of results in randomized controlled trials: the Cochrane review on exercise therapy for low back pain as an example. Spine 31:1405–1409CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mancuso F, Hamilton TW, Kumar V, Murray DW, Pandit H (2016) Clinical outcome after UKA and HTO in ACL deficiency: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24:112–122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Martin JG, Wallace DA, Woods DA, Carr AJ, Murray DW (1995) Revision of unicondylar knee total knee replacements to total knee replacement. Knee 2:121–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ (1998) The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 80-B:983–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pandit H, Beard DJ, Jenkins C, Kimstra Y, Thomas NP, Dodd CAF et al (2006) Combined anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:887–892CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Price AJ, Dodd CA, Svard UG, Murray DW (2005) Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients younger and older than 60 years of age. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 87-B:1488–1492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Suggs JF, Li G, Park SE, Steffensmeier S, Rubash HE, Freiberg AA (2004) Function of the anterior cruciate ligament after uni- compartmental knee arthroplasty: an in vivo robotic study. J Arthroplasty 19:224–229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tian S, Wang B, Wang Y, Ha C, Liu L, Sun K (2016) Combined unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in knees with osteoarthritis and deficient anterior cruciate ligament. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 17:327CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tibrewal SB, Grant KA, Goodfellow JW (1984) The radiolucent line beneath the tibial components of the Oxford meniscal knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 66:523–528PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tinius M, Ecker TM, Klima S, Tinius W, Josten C (2007) Minimally invasive unicondylar knee arthroplasty with simultaneous ACL reconstruction: treatment of medial compartment osteoarthritis and cruciate ligament defect. Unfallchirurg 110:1030–1038CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tinius M, Hepp P, Becker R (2012) Combined unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20:81–87CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    van Meer BL, Meuffels DE, van Eijsden WA, Verhaar JA, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Reijman M (2015) Which determinants predict tibiofemoral and patellofemoral osteoarthritis after anterior cruciate ligament injury? A systematic review. Br J Sports Med 49:975–983CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    van Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L (2003) Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:1290–1299Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ventura A, Legnani C, Terzaghi C, Iori S, Borgo E (2017) Medial unicondylar knee arthroplasty combined to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:675–680CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Weston-Simons JS, Pandit H, Jenkins C, Jackson WF, Price AJ, Gill HS et al (2012) 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 94:1216–1220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Whittaker JP, Naudie DD, McAuley JP, McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ, Bourne RB (2010) Does bearing design influence midterm survivorship of unicompartmental arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:73–81CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Williams RJ III, Wickiewicz TL, Warren RF (2000) Management of unicompartmental arthritis in the anterior cruciate ligament- deficient knee. Am J Sports Med 28:749–760CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yamaguchi S, Gamada K, Sasho T, Kato H, Sonoda M, Banks SA (2009) In vivo kinematics of anterior cruciate ligament deficient knees during pivot and squat activities. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 24:71–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zhang Q, Zhang Q, Guo W, Liu Z, Cheng L, Zhu G (2015) No need for use of drainage after minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized, controlled trial. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 135:709–713CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Trauma and OrthopaedicsUniversity College London HospitalLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Trauma and OrthopaedicsManipal HospitalBangaloreIndia
  3. 3.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Erasmus MCUniversity Medical Centre RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations