Abstract
Purpose
Bone cutting errors can cause malalignment of unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKA). Although the extent of tibial malalignment due to horizontal cutting errors has been well reported, there is a lack of studies evaluating malalignment as a consequence of keel cutting errors, particularly in the Oxford UKA. The purpose of this study was to examine keel cutting errors during Oxford UKA placement using a navigation system and to clarify whether two different tibial keel cutting techniques would have different error rates.
Methods
The alignment of the tibial cut surface after a horizontal osteotomy and the surface of the tibial trial component was measured with a navigation system. Cutting error was defined as the angular difference between these measurements. The following two techniques were used: the standard “pushing” technique in 83 patients (group P) and a modified “dolphin” technique in 41 patients (group D).
Results
In all 123 patients studied, the mean absolute keel cutting error was 1.7° and 1.4° in the coronal and sagittal planes, respectively. In group P, there were 22 outlier patients (27 %) in the coronal plane and 13 (16 %) in the sagittal plane. Group D had three outlier patients (8 %) in the coronal plane and none (0 %) in the sagittal plane. Significant differences were observed in the outlier ratio of these techniques in both the sagittal (P = 0.014) and coronal (P = 0.008) planes.
Conclusion
Our study demonstrated overall keel cutting errors of 1.7° in the coronal plane and 1.4° in the sagittal plane. The “dolphin” technique was found to significantly reduce keel cutting errors on the tibial side. This technique will be useful for accurate component positioning and therefore improve the longevity of Oxford UKAs.
Level of evidence
Retrospective comparative study, Level III.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bathis H, Perlick L, Tingart M, Luring C, Grifka J (2005) Intraoperative cutting errors in total knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 125(1):16–20
Chua KH, Chen Y, Lingaraj K (2014) Navigated total knee arthroplasty: is it error-free? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(3):643–649
Dao Trong ML, Diezi C, Goerres G, Helmy N (2015) Improved positioning of the tibial component in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with patient-specific cutting blocks. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(7):1993–1998
Emerson RH Jr (2007) Preoperative and postoperative limb alignment after Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 30(5 Suppl.):32–34
Gulati A, Chau R, Simpson DJ, Dodd CA, Gill HS, Murray DW (2009) Influence of component alignment on outcome for unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee 16(3):196–199
Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2004) Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 423:161–165
Ishida K, Shibanuma N, Matsumoto T, Sasaki H, Takayama K, Toda A, Kuroda R, Kurosaka M (2015) Factors affecting intraoperative kinematic pattern and flexion angles in navigated total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(6):1741–1747
Inui H, Taketomi S, Nakamura K, Takei S, Takeda H, Tanaka S, Nakagawa T (2013) Influence of navigation system updates on total knee arthroplasty. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. doi:10.1186/2052-1847-5-10
Inui H, Taketomi S, Yamagami R, Sanada T, Tanaka S (2016) Twice cutting method reduces tibial cutting error in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 23(1):173–176
Kanda Y (2013) Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software ‘EZR’ for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant 48:452–458
Kim TK, Chang CB, Kang YG, Chung BJ, Cho HJ, Seong SC (2010) Execution accuracy of bone resection and implant fixation in computer assisted minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty. Knee 17(1):23–28
Pandit H, Jenkins C, Gill HS, Barker K, Dodd CA, Murray DS (2011) Minimally invasive Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement: results of 1000cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93(2):198–204
Plaskos C, Hodgson AJ, Inkpen K, McGraw RW (2002) Bone cutting errors in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 17(6):698–705
Price AJ, Svard U (2011) A second decade lifetable survival analysis of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(1):174–179
Ridgeway SR, McAuley JP, Ammeen DJ, Engh GA (2002) The effect of alignment of the knee on the outcome of unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84(3):351–355
Tashiro Y, Matsuda S, Okazaki K, Mizu-uchi H, Kuwashima U, Iwamoto Y (2014) The coronal alignment after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty can be predicted: usefulness of full-length valgus stress radiography for evaluating correctability. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(12):3142–4149
White SH, Ludkowski PF, Goodfellow JW (1991) Anteromedial osteoarthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73(4):582–586
Yau WP, Chiu KY (2008) Cutting errors in total knee replacement: assessment by computer assisted surgery. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16(7):670–673
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Edanz Editing Global (http://www.edanzediting.co.jp/) for the English language review.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Inui, H., Taketomi, S., Tahara, K. et al. A modified technique to reduce tibial keel cutting errors during an Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25, 710–716 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4151-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4151-9