Skip to main content
Log in

Cementless versus cemented Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: early results of a non-designer user group

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

Although fewer tibial radiolucent lines are observed in cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) compared with cemented Oxford UKA, an independent comparative study on this topic is lacking.

Methods

In this multicentre retrospective study, a cohort of 60 consecutive cases of cementless Oxford UKA is compared with a cohort of 60 consecutive cases of cemented Oxford UKA. Radiolucent lines, survival, perioperative data and clinical results were compared.

Results

No complete tibial radiolucent lines were observed in either group. Seventeen per cent of partial tibial radiolucent lines were observed in the cementless group versus 21 % in the cemented group (n.s.). The percentage of tibial radiolucent zones was 4 versus 9 %, respectively (p = 0.036). Survival rates were 90 % at 34 months for the cementless group and 84 % at 54 months for the cemented group (n.s.). Mean operation time was 10 min shorter in the cementless group (p < 0.001), and clinical results were not significantly different.

Conclusions

Although no significant differences in radiolucent lines were found between both groups, they appear to be more common in the cemented group. This confirms previous results from reports by prosthesis designers. The presence of radiolucent lines after cemented Oxford UKA does not correlate with clinical outcome or survival.

Level of evidence

III.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kendrick BJ, Kaptein BL, Valstar ER, Gill HS, Jackson WF, Dodd CA, Price AJ, Murray DW (2015) Cemented versus cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using radiostereometric analysis: a randomised controlled trial. Bone Joint J 97-B:185–191

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lisowski LA, van den Bekerom MP, Pilot P, van Dijk CN, Lisowski AE (2011) Oxford Phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: medium-term results of a minimally invasive surgical procedure. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:277–284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ (1998) The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:983–989

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Pandit HG, Campi S, Hamilton TW, Dada OD, Pollalis S, Jenkins C, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2015) Five-year experience of cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3879-y10.1007/s00167-015-3879-y

    Google Scholar 

  6. Epinette JA, Manley MT (2008) Is hydroxyapatite a reliable fixation option in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty? A 5- to 13-year experience with the hydroxyapatite-coated unix prosthesis. J Knee Surg 21:299–306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hall MJ, Connell DA, Morris HG (2013) Medium to long-term results of the UNIX uncemented unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee 20:328–331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Forsythe ME, Englund RE, Leighton RK (2000) Unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a cementless perspective. Can J Surg 43:417–424

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Dervin GF, Carruthers C, Feibel RJ, Giachino AA, Kim PR, Thurston PR (2011) Initial experience with the oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 26:192–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kendrick BJ, Longino D, Pandit H, Svard U, Gill HS, Dodd CA, Murray DW, Price AJ (2010) Polyethylene wear in Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement: a retrieval study of 47 bearings. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92:367–373

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kerens B, Boonen B, Schotanus M, Kort N (2013) Patient-specific guide for revision of medial unicondylar knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty: beneficial first results of a new operating technique performed on 10 patients. Acta Orthop 84:165–169

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Gulati A, Chau R, Pandit HG, Gray H, Price AJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2009) The incidence of physiological radiolucency following Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement and its relationship to outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91:896–902

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kerens B, Boonen B, Schotanus MG, Lacroix H, Emans PJ, Kort NP (2013) Revision from unicompartmental to total knee replacement: the clinical outcome depends on reason for revision. Bone Joint J 95-B:1204–1208

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hooper GJ, Maxwell AR, Wilkinson B, Mathew J, Woodfield TB, Penny ID, Burn PJ, Frampton C (2012) The early radiological results of the uncemented Oxford medial compartment knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 94:334–338

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Liddle AD, Pandit H, Murray DW, Dodd CA (2013) Cementless unicondylar knee arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 44:261–269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Liddle AD, Pandit H, O’Brien S, Doran E, Penny ID, Hooper GJ, Burn PJ, Dodd CA, Beverland DE, Maxwell AR, Murray DW (2013) Cementless fixation in Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement: a multicentre study of 1000 knees. Bone Joint J 95-B:181–187

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Magnussen PA, Bartlett RJ (1990) Cementless PCA unicompartmental joint arthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the knee. A prospective study of 51 cases. J Arthroplasty 5:151–158

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pandit H, Jenkins C, Beard DJ, Gallagher J, Price AJ, Dodd CA, Goodfellow JW, Murray DW (2009) Cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement shows reduced radiolucency at one year. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91:185–189

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Pandit H, Liddle AD, Kendrick BJ, Jenkins C, Price AJ, Gill HS, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2013) Improved fixation in cementless unicompartmental knee replacement: five-year results of a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95:1365–1372

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2006) Unicompartmental arthroplasty with the Oxford knee, vol 190, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  21. Tibrewal SB, Grant KA, Goodfellow JW (1984) The radiolucent line beneath the tibial components of the Oxford meniscal knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 66:523–528

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Clarius M, Mohr G, Jaeger S, Seeger JB, Bitsch RG (2010) Femoral fixation pattern in cemented Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty—an experimental cadaver study. Knee 17:398–402

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kendrick BJ, James AR, Pandit H, Gill HS, Price AJ, Blunn GW, Murray DW (2012) Histology of the bone-cement interface in retrieved Oxford unicompartmental knee replacements. Knee 19:918–922

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Clarius M, Hauck C, Seeger JB, James A, Murray DW, Aldinger PR (2009) Pulsed lavage reduces the incidence of radiolucent lines under the tibial tray of Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: pulsed lavage versus syringe lavage. Int Orthop 33:1585–1590

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Heller S, Fenichel I, Salai M, Luria T, Velkes S (2009) The Oxford unicompartmental knee prosthesis for the treatment of medial compartment knee disease: 2 to 5 year follow-up. Isr Med Assoc J 11:266–268

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Labek G, Sekyra K, Pawelka W, Janda W, Stockl B (2011) Outcome and reproducibility of data concerning the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a structured literature review including arthroplasty registry data. Acta Orthop 82:131–135

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Zermatten P, Munzinger U (2012) The Oxford II medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: an independent 10-year survival study. Acta Orthop Belg 78:203–209

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B. Kerens.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. One author (NK) is a paid consultant for Biomet.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kerens, B., Schotanus, M.G.M., Boonen, B. et al. Cementless versus cemented Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: early results of a non-designer user group. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25, 703–709 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4149-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4149-3

Keywords

Navigation