Advertisement

Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

  • Jean-Yves JennyEmail author
Expert's Opinion • KNEE - ARTHROPLASTY
  • 254 Downloads

Abstract

The exact indication for a unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) remains debated. Minimally invasive techniques have been developed to decrease the surgical trauma related to the prosthesis implantation, and this technique is well fitted to UKA. However, there are concerns about loss of accuracy with minimally invasive techniques. Furthermore, rapid recovery techniques have been developed in order to reduce the length of hospital stay. Again, UKA is well fitted to these new developments of postoperative care. We combine routinely a minimal invasive operative technique with navigation assistance to ensure proper positioning of the implants as well as an optimal ligamentous balance. Instruments have been adapted for use with a typical 6-cm skin incision with little change from the conventional navigated operating technique. A multimodal pain treatment is implemented immediately after the implantation, with special attention to a routine saphenous nerve blockade. Patients are instructed to stand up on the day of surgery with full weight bearing and to mobilize the knee joint without restriction. They may be discharged at least on the day following surgery, and the most favorable patients may be operated in our day-case surgery unit. These conclusions should be confirmed on a larger scale.

Keywords

Knee Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty Minimal invasive 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

JYJ receives royalties from Aesculap, is a paid consultant for Exactech, received meeting support from FH Orthopedics, is member of the board of the French Society for Hip and Knee Surgery and is Treasurer of CAS International.

References

  1. 1.
    Romanowski MR, Repicci JA (2002) Minimally invasive unicondylar arthroplasty: eight-year follow-up. J Knee Surg 15:17–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tria AJ Jr (2003) Advancements in minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 26:s859–s863PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jenny JY, Ciobanu E, Boeri C (2007) The rationale for navigated minimally invasive unicompartmental knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 463:58–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berend KR, Lombardi AV Jr, Mallory TH, Adams JB, Groseth KL (2005) Early failure of minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is associated with obesity. Clin Orthop Relat Res 440:60–66CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dalury DF, Dennis DA (2005) Mini-incision total knee arthroplasty can increase risk of component malalignment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 440:77–81CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hamilton WG, Collier MB, Tarabee E, McAuley JP, Engh CA Jr, Engh GA (2006) Incidence and reasons for reoperation after minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 21(Suppl 2):98–107CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Husted H (2012) Fast-track hip and knee arthroplasty: clinical and organizational aspects. Acta Orthop Suppl 83(346):1–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Delp SL, Stulberg SD, Davies BL, Picard F, Leitner F (1998) Computer assisted knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 354:49–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cossey AJ, Spriggins AJ (2005) The use of computer-assisted surgical navigation to prevent malalignment in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 20:29–34CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jenny JY, Boeri C (2003) Unicompartmental knee prosthesis implantation with a non-image-based navigation system: rationale, technique, case–control comparative study with a conventional instrumented implantation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 11:40–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Perlick L, Bathis H, Tingart M, Perlick C, Luring C, Grifka J (2004) Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee replacement with a non image-based navigation system. Int Orthop 28:193–197CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jenny JY, Boeri C (2003) Unicompartmental knee prosthesis implantation with a non-image-based navigation system: rationale, technique, case–control comparative study with a conventional instrumented implantation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 11:40–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rytter S, Stilling M, Munk S, Hansen TB (2017) Methylprednisolone reduces pain and decreases knee swelling in the first 24 h after fast-track unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:284–290CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    De Oliveira GS, Jr Castro-Alves LJ, Ahmad S, Kendall MC, McCarthy RJ (2013) Dexamethasone to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Anesth Analg 116:58–74CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nielsen CS, Jans Ø, Ørsnes T, Foss NB, Troelsen A, Husted H (2016) Combined intra-articular and intravenous tranexamic acid reduces blood loss in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. J Bone Jt Surg Am 98(10):835–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Koh IJ, Choi YJ, Kim MS, Koh HJ, Kang MS, In Y (2017) Femoral nerve block versus adductor canal block for analgesia after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Relat Res 29:87–95CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jenny JY, Pabinger I, Samama CM, ESA VTE Guidelines Task Force (2017) European guidelines on perioperative venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: aspirin. Eur J Anaesthesiol (Epub ahead of print) Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Venclauskas L, Llau JV, Jenny JY, Kjaersgaard-Andersen P, Jans Ø, ESA VTE Guidelines Task Force (2017) European guidelines on perioperative venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: day surgery and fast-track surgery. Eur J Anaesthesiol (Epub ahead of print) Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Scuderi GR, Tenholder M, Capeci C (2004) Surgical approaches in mini-incision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:61–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Muller PE, Pellengahr C, Witt M, Kircher J, Refior HJ, Jansson V (2004) Influence of minimally invasive surgery on implant positioning and the functional outcome for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 19:296–301CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Price AJ, Webb J, Topf H, Dodd CAF, Goodfellow JW, Murray DW (2001) Rapid recovery after Oxford unicompartmental arthroplasty through a short incision. J Arthroplasty 16:970–976CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reilly KA, Beard DJ, Barker KL, Dodd CA, Price AJ, Murray DW (2005) Efficacy of an accelerated recovery protocol for Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A randomised controlled trial. Knee 12:351–357CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Forster-Horváth C, Artz N, Hassaballa MA, Robinson JR, Porteous AJ, Murray JR, Newman JH (2016) Survivorship and clinical outcome of the minimally invasive Uniglide medial fixed bearing, all-polyethylene tibia, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a mean follow-up of 7.3 years. Knee 23:981–986CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Larsson SE, Larsson S, Lundkvist S (1988) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 232:174–181Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    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 Jt Surg Br 84:351–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2004) Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 423:161–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Husted H, Jensen CM, Solgaard S, Kehlet H (2012) Reduced length of stay following hip and knee arthroplasty in Denmark 2000–2009: from research to implementation. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 132:101–104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wied C, Thomsen MG, Kallemose T, Myhrmann L, Jensen LS, Husted H, Troelsen A (2015) The risk of manipulation under anesthesia due to unsatisfactory knee flexion after fast-track total knee arthroplasty. Knee 22:419–423CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Munk S, Dalsgaard J, Bjerggaard K, Andersen I, Hansen TB, Kehlet H (2012) Early recovery after fast-track Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. 35 patients with minimal invasive surgery. Acta Orthop 83:41–45CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ruiz N, Buisson X, Filippi G, Roulet M, Robert H, Orthopedics, Traumatology Society of Western France (SOO) (2017) Ambulatory unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: short outcome of 50 first cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res (Epub ahead of print) Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jørgensen CC, Kehlet H, Lundbeck Foundation Centre for Fast-Track Hip and Knee Replacement Collaborative Group (2012) Role of patient characteristics for fast-track hip and knee arthroplasty. Br J Anaesth 110:972–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Breu A, Eckl S, Zink W, Kujat R, Angele P (2013) Cytotoxicity of local anesthetics on human mesenchymal stem cells in vitro. Arthroscopy 29:1676–1684CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre de Chirurgie Orthopédique et de la MainHôpitaux Universitaires de StrasbourgIllkirch-GraffenstadenFrance

Personalised recommendations