Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

, Volume 468, Issue 2, pp 576–580 | Cite as

Reintervention after Mobile-bearing Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

  • Marcia Clark
  • David G. Campbell
  • Greg Kiss
  • Peter J. Dobson
  • Peter L. Lewis
Clinical Research



Medial compartment osteoarthritis is a common disorder that often is treated by unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Although the Oxford 3 prosthesis is commonly used based on revision rate and cumulative survival, our experience suggests that although there may be adequate implant survival rates, we observed a worrisome and undisclosed reintervention rate of nonrevision procedures.


We describe the frequency and cause of repeat intervention subsequent to implanting this device.


Between 1998 and 2005, 398 patients underwent UKA using the Oxford 3 prosthesis. The minimum followup was 12 months (mean, 43 months; range, 12–102 months).


Forty of the 398 (10%) patients had 55 (13.8%) repeat anesthetics (reintervention). There were 38 nonrevision reinterventions. Revision was performed in 15 patients (3.8%), but two patients had a second revision (17 revisions or 4.3%). We revised the UKA to a second UKA in seven of the 15 cases but two subsequently were rerevised to a TKA; eight were revised directly to a TKA.


Although our data confirm the reported revision rates for this prosthesis, we observed a substantial reintervention rate. Most of the reinterventions are minor and are diagnosed frequently and treated arthroscopically. If revision is required, a second UKA may be considered and performed successfully in patients with isolated loosening of one component.

Level of Evidence

Level II, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


  1. 1.
    AOA National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide, Australia: Australian Orthopaedic Association; 2007:1–223. Available at: Accessed August 28, 2009.
  2. 2.
    Emerson RH Jr, Higgins LL. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the Oxford prosthesis in patients with medial compartment arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:118–122.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gioe TJ, Killeen KK, Hoeffel DP, Bert JM, Comfort TK, Scheltema K, Mehle S, Grimm K. Analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in a community-based implant registry. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;416:111–119.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gleeson RE, Evans R, Ackroyd CE, Webb J, Newman JH. Fixed or mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacement? A comparative cohort study. Knee. 2004;11:379–384.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hamilton WG, Collier MB, Tarabee E, McAuley JP, Engh CA Jr, Engh GA. Incidence and reasons for reoperation after minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2006;21(6 suppl 2):98–107.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    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;78:128–135.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McAuley JP, Engh GA, Ammeen DJ. Revision of the failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;392:279–282.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ. The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:983–989.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pandit H, Jenkins C, Barker K, Dodd CA, Murray DW. The Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement using a minimally-invasive approach. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:54–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rajasekhar C, Das S, Smith A. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: 2- to 12-year results in a community hospital. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004;86:983–985.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Svard UC, Price AJ. Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a survival analysis of an independent series. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83:191–194.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Verdonk R, Cottenie D, Almqvist KF, Vorlat P. The Oxford unicompartmental knee prosthesis: a 2–14 year follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2005;13:163–166.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcia Clark
    • 1
  • David G. Campbell
    • 1
  • Greg Kiss
    • 1
  • Peter J. Dobson
    • 1
  • Peter L. Lewis
    • 1
  1. 1.Wakefield Orthopaedic Clinic, St AdelaideAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations