Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

No differences in 10-year clinical outcomes and quality of life between patients with different mediolateral femoral component positions in fixed-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

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

Abstract

Purpose

There has been a paucity of literature evaluating the role of mediolateral femoral component position (FCP) in medial unicompartmental arthroplasty (UKA). Hence, the aim of this study is to evaluate whether the mediolateral FCP in UKA will affect the 10-year clinical outcomes and quality of life of patients who underwent medial UKA.

Methods

Data of 262 patients who underwent medial UKA were analyzed. All patients were assessed at 6 months, 2 years and 10 years using the Knee Society Function Score, Knee Society Knee Score, Oxford Knee Score, Short-Form 36 Physical/Mental Component Scores and postoperative satisfaction. The mediolateral FCP on postoperative radiographs was measured by independent assessors using the Picture Archiving and Communication Systems. 144 patients were distributed into group C (center), 98 into group M (medial) and 20 into group L (lateral) according to FCP, and one-way ANOVA was used to compare the functional outcomes of the three groups.

Results

No statistical differences were found between the three groups in terms of 10-year clinical outcomes, quality of life, satisfaction rates and revision rates.

Conclusion

Differences in mediolateral FCP did not result in significant difference in 10-year postoperative clinical outcomes for patients who underwent fixed-bearing medial UKAs.

Level of evidence

Retrospective study, Level III.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mohammad HR, Strickland L, Hamilton TW, Murray DW (2018) Long-term outcomes of over 8,000 medial Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knees-a systematic review. Acta Orthop 89:101–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Tadros BJ, Dabis J, Twyman R (2018) Short-term outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the octogenarian population. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26:1571–1576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Vasso M, Del Regno C, Perisano C, D’Amelio A, Corona K, Panni AS (2015) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is effective: ten year results. Int Orthop 39:2341–2346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brown NM, Sheth NP, Davis K, Berend ME, Lombardi AV, Berend KR et al (2012) Total knee arthroplasty has higher postoperative morbidity than unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a multicenter analysis. J Arthroplasty 27:86–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lombardi AV Jr, Berend KR, Walter CA, Aziz-Jacobo J, Cheney NA (2009) Is recovery faster for mobile-bearing unicompartmental than total knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:1450–1457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hauer G, Sadoghi P, Bernhardt GA, Wolf M, Ruckenstuhl P, Fink A et al (2020) Greater activity, better range of motion and higher quality of life following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a comparative case-control study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 140:231–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ollivier M, Abdel MP, Parratte S, Argenson JN (2014) Lateral unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA): contemporary indications, surgical technique, and results. Int Orthop 38:449–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Johal S, Nakano N, Baxter M, Hujazi I, Pandit H, Khanduja V (2018) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: the past, current controversies, and future perspectives. J Knee Surg 31:992–998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Niinimaki T, Eskelinen A, Makela K, Ohtonen P, Puhto AP, Remes V (2014) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty survivorship is lower than TKA survivorship: a 27-year Finnish registry study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472:1496–1501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Woo YL, Chen YQ, Lai MC, Tay KJ, Chia SL, Lo NN et al (2017) Does obesity influence early outcome of fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty? J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 25:2309499016684297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Xu S, Chen JY, Lo NN, Chia SL, Tay DKJ, Pang HN et al (2018) The influence of obesity on functional outcome and quality of life after total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 100B:579–583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Koh IJ, Kim MS, Sohn S, Song KY, Choi NY, Jung H et al (2019) Predictive factors for satisfaction after contemporary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and high tibial osteotomy in isolated medial femorotibial osteoarthritis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 105:77–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kang KT, Son J, Kwon SK, Kwon OR, Koh YG (2018) Preservation of femoral and tibial coronal alignment to improve biomechanical effects of medial unicompartment knee arthroplasty: computational study. Biomed Mater Eng 29:651–664

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Clarius M, Hauck C, Seeger JB, Pritsch M, Merle C, Aldinger PR (2010) Correlation of positioning and clinical results in Oxford UKA. Int Orthop 34:1145–1151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Franz A, Boese CK, Matthies A, Leffler J, Ries C (2019) Mid-term clinical outcome and reconstruction of posterior tibial slope after UKA. J Knee Surg 32:468–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kamenaga T, Hiranaka T, Takayama K, Tsubosaka M, Kuroda R, Matsumoto T (2019) Adequate positioning of the tibial component is key to avoiding bearing impingement in oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 34:2606–2613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Khow YZ, Liow MHL, Lee M, Chen JY, Lo NN, Yeo SJ (2020) Coronal alignment of fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty femoral component may affect long-term clinical outcomes. J Arthroplasty. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2020.07.070

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhu GD, Guo WS, Zhang QD, Liu ZH, Cheng LM (2015) Finite element analysis of mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty the influence of tibial component coronal alignment. Chin Med J 128:2873–2878

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Iriberri I, Aragon JF (2014) Alignment of the tibial component of the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, assessed in the axial view by CT scan: does it influence the outcome? Knee 21:1269–1274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kamenaga T, Takayama K, Ishida K, Hayashi S, Kuroda R, Matsumoto T (2020) Central implantation of the femoral component relative to the tibial insert improves clinical outcomes in fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 35:3108–3116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kang KT, Son J, Koh YG, Kwon OR, Kwon SK, Lee YJ et al (2018) Effect of femoral component position on biomechanical outcomes of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 25:491–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kozinn SC, Scott R (1989) Unicondylar knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 71:145–150

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN (1989) Rationale of the knee society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:13–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Murray DW, Fitzpatrick R, Rogers K, Pandit H, Beard DJ, Carr AJ et al (2007) The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:1010–1014

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30:473–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Bayliss MS, Mchorney CA, Ware JE, Kosinski M et al (1995) Comparison of methods for the scoring and statistical analysis of SF-36 health profile and summary measures: summary results from the medical outcomes study. Med Care 33:AS264–AS279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Woo BJ, Chen JY, Lai YM, Liow MHL, Lo NN, Yeo SJ (2020) Improvements in functional outcome and quality of life are not sustainable for patients >/= 68 years old 10 years after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06200-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ji JH, Park SE, Song IS, Kang H, Ha JY, Jeong JJ (2014) Complications of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg 6:365–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Badawy M, Espehaug B, Indrekvam K, Havelin LI, Furnes O (2014) Higher revision risk for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in low-volume hospitals. Acta Orthop 85:342–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sculco TP (2002) Orthopaedic crossfire–can we justify unicondylar arthroplasty as a temporizing procedure? In opposition. J Arthroplasty 17:56–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kang KT, Son J, Baek C, Kwon OR, Koh YG (2018) Femoral component alignment in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty leads to biomechanical change in contact stress and collateral ligament force in knee joint. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 138:563–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Woiczinski M, Schroder C, Paulus A, Kistler M, Jansson V, Muller PE et al (2020) Varus or valgus positioning of the tibial component of a unicompartmental fixed-bearing knee arthroplasty does not increase wear. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28:3016–3021

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the NCSS Award (13/FY2017/P1/16-A30).

Funding

There is no funding source.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Outram Road Academia Building Level 4, Singapore, 169608, Singapore

    Bo Jun Woo, Ming Han Lincoln Liow, Ngai Nung Lo, Seng Jin Yeo & Jerry Yongqiang Chen

Authors
  1. Bo Jun Woo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ming Han Lincoln Liow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ngai Nung Lo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Seng Jin Yeo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jerry Yongqiang Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors were fully involved in the study and preparation of the manuscript and the material within has not been and will not be submitted for publication elsewhere.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bo Jun Woo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the hospital’s ethics board (CIRB:2020/2581) and performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all patients.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Woo, B.J., Liow, M.H.L., Lo, N.N. et al. No differences in 10-year clinical outcomes and quality of life between patients with different mediolateral femoral component positions in fixed-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 30, 3176–3183 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06620-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06620-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation