Mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in old-aged patients demonstrates superior short-term clinical outcomes to open-wedge high tibial osteotomy in middle-aged patients with advanced isolated medial osteoarthritis

  • Won-Joon Cho
  • Jong-Min Kim
  • Won-Kyeong Kim
  • Dong-Eun Kim
  • Nam-Ki Kim
  • Seong-Il Bin
Original Paper
  • 62 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical outcomes of mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (MB-UKA) and open-wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO) for advanced isolated medial osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

Patients with advanced medial compartment OA (Ahlbäck grade ≥ II) who underwent either MB-UKA with Oxford Knee or OWHTO were included. The minimum follow-up was two years. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, knee score (KS), and function score (FS) of the Knee Society Knee Scoring System. Pre-operative and post-operative values were compared within groups. Pre-operative and post-operative values and the degree of change were compared between the two groups. Radiologic progression of OA in either the lateral or patellofemoral compartment was evaluated.

Results

Forty knees (20 received MB-UKA, 20 received OWHTO) were enrolled. The mean age was higher in the MB-UKA group (67.9 ± 9.0 years) than in the OWHTO group (58.4 ± 5.5 years). The HSS score, KS, and FS were significantly increased post-operatively in both groups. The preoperative HSS score, KS, and FS were significantly lower in the MB-UKA than in the OWHTO group; however, only the post-operative HSS score was significantly higher in the MB-UKA group. The changes in HSS score and KS were also greater in the MB-UKA group. There was no significant difference in OA progression.

Conclusions

Although there was an age difference between the two groups, MB-UKA demonstrated superior short-term clinical outcomes to OWHTO for advanced isolated medial OA. In particular, MB-UKA was more effective in terms of pain relief.

Keywords

Mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty Open-wedge high tibial osteotomy Advanced isolated medial osteoarthritis Clinical outcomes 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board of our hospital.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Agneskirchner JD, Hurschler C, Wrann CD, Lobenhoffer P (2007) The effects of valgus medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy on articular cartilage pressure of the knee: a biomechanical study. Arthroscopy 23:852–861.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2007.05.018 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amendola A, Bonasia DE (2010) Results of high tibial osteotomy: review of the literature. Int Orthop 34:155–160.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-009-0889-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Flecher X, Parratte S, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN (2006) A 12-28-year followup study of closing wedge high tibial osteotomy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 452:91–96.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000229362.12244.f6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Floerkemeier S, Staubli AE, Schroeter S, Goldhahn S, Lobenhoffer P (2013) Outcome after high tibial open-wedge osteotomy: a retrospective evaluation of 533 patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:170–180.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2087-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bode G, von Heyden J, Pestka J, Schmal H, Salzmann G, Sudkamp N, Niemeyer P (2015) Prospective 5-year survival rate data following open-wedge valgus high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:1949–1955.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2762-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Niemeyer P, Schmal H, Hauschild O, von Heyden J, Sudkamp NP, Kostler W (2010) Open-wedge osteotomy using an internal plate fixator in patients with medial-compartment gonarthritis and varus malalignment: 3-year results with regard to preoperative arthroscopic and radiographic findings. Arthroscopy 26:1607–1616.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2010.05.006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bonasia DE, Dettoni F, Sito G, Blonna D, Marmotti A, Bruzzone M, Castoldi F, Rossi R (2014) Medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy for medial compartment overload/arthritis in the varus knee: prognostic factors. Am J Sports Med 42:690–698.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546513516577 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Argenson JN, Chevrol-Benkeddache Y, Aubaniac JM (2002) Modern unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with cement: a three to ten-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A:2235–2239CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hasegawa Y, Ooishi Y, Shimizu T, Sugiura H, Takahashi S, Ito H, Iwata H (1998) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for medial gonarthrosis: 5 to 9 years follow-up evaluation of 77 knees. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 117:183–187CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Peersman G, Stuyts B, Vandenlangenbergh T, Cartier P, Fennema P (2015) Fixed-versus mobile-bearing UKA: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:3296–3305.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3131-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle 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 80:983–989CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Petersen W, Metzlaff S (2016) Open wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTO) versus mobile bearing unicondylar medial joint replacement: five years results. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136:983–989.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-016-2465-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tuncay I, Bilsel K, Elmadag M, Erkocak OF, Asci M, Sen C (2015) Evaluation of mobile bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, opening wedge, and dome-type high tibial osteotomies for knee arthritis. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 49:280–287.  https://doi.org/10.3944/aott.2015.14.0320 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dettoni F, Bonasia DE, Castoldi F, Bruzzone M, Blonna D, Rossi R (2010) High tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for medial compartment arthrosis of the knee: a review of the literature. Iowa Orthop J 30:131–140PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Trieb K, Grohs J, Hanslik-Schnabel B, Stulnig T, Panotopoulos J, Wanivenhaus A (2006) Age predicts outcome of high-tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:149–152.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-005-0638-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Borus T, Thornhill T (2008) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 16:9–18CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Naudie D, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, Bourne TJ (1999) The Install Award. Survivorship of the high tibial valgus osteotomy. A 10-to-22-year followup study. Clin Orthop Relat Res:18–27Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Aglietti P, Rinonapoli E, Stringa G, Taviani A (1983) Tibial osteotomy for the varus osteoarthritic knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res 239–251Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brouwer RW, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, van Koeveringe AJ, Verhaar JA (2005) Patellar height and the inclination of the tibial plateau after high tibial osteotomy. The open versus the closed-wedge technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:1227–1232.  https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.87b9.15972 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gaasbeek R, Welsing R, Barink M, Verdonschot N, van Kampen A (2007) The influence of open and closed high tibial osteotomy on dynamic patellar tracking: a biomechanical study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15:978–984.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-007-0305-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oh KJ, Kim YC, Lee JS, Chang YS, Shetty GM, Nha KW (2017) Open-wedge high tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: no difference in progression of patellofemoral joint arthritis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:767–772.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4450-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pandit H, Jenkins C, Barker K, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2006) The Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement using a minimally-invasive approach. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:54–60.  https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.88b1.17114 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Koskinen E, Paavolainen P, Eskelinen A, Pulkkinen P, Remes V (2007) Unicondylar knee replacement for primary osteoarthritis: a prospective follow-up study of 1,819 patients from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 78:128–135.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17453670610013538 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Meidinger G, Imhoff AB, Paul J, Kirchhoff C, Sauerschnig M, Hinterwimmer S (2011) May smokers and overweight patients be treated with a medial open-wedge HTO? Risk factors for non-union. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:333–339.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-010-1335-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© SICOT aisbl 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Asan Medical CenterUniversity of Ulsan College of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryMedi-Yin HospitalPajuSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryHospital RunSeoulSouth Korea
  4. 4.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryIncheon Red Cross HospitalIncheonSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations