Medial unicondylar knee arthroplasty combined to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
- 748 Downloads
The purpose of the present study was to retrospectively evaluate the outcomes of patients who underwent combined medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The hypothesis was that this procedure would lead to a high success rate in patients affected by isolated medial unicompartmental osteoarthritis and concomitant ACL deficiency.
Fourteen patients with primary ACL lesion and concomitant medial compartment symptomatic osteoarthritis treated from 2006 to 2010 were followed up for an average time of 26.7 months (SD 4.2). Assessment included KOOS score, Oxford Knee score, American Knee Society scores, WOMAC index of osteoarthritis, Tegner activity level and objective examination including instrumented laxity test with KT-1000 arthrometer. Radiological assessment was done with standard simple radiographs in order to get information about any presence of loosening of the components.
KOOS score, OKS, WOMAC index and the AKSS improved significantly after surgery (p < 0.001). Regarding AKSS, improvement was noted both in the objective score and in the functional one (p < 0.001). There was no clinical evidence of instability in any of the knees as evaluated with clinical laxity testing. No pathologic radiolucent lines were observed around the components. In one patient signs of osteoarthritis in the lateral compartment were observed 28 months after surgery.
UKA combined with ACL reconstruction is a valid therapeutic option for the treatment of combined medial unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis and ACL deficiency in young and active patients and confirms subjective and objective clinical improvement 2 years after surgery. The use of a fixed-bearing prosthesis represents a reliable feature as it allows to overcome problems of improper ligament tensioning during the implantation of the components.
Level of evidence
KeywordsMedial unicondylar knee prosthesis Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction Anterior cruciate ligament deficiency Medial compartment osteoarthritis Knee instability
The authors wish to thank Dr. Valentina Ferrari, MD, for her contribution to data acquisition for this study.
- 1.Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campdell J, Stitt LW (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.Fergusson CM (2000) Management of the young patient with an osteoarthritic knee. In: Allum RL, Fergusson CM, Thomas NP (eds) Clinical challenges in orthopaedics: the knee. Martin Dunitz Ltd, London, pp 1–12Google Scholar
- 10.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 70:672–701Google Scholar
- 11.Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN (1989) Rational of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:13–14Google Scholar
- 14.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
- 16.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
- 26.Tegner Y, Lysholm J (1985) Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res 198:43–49Google Scholar
- 28.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