Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Unikondylärer Schlitten vs. Umstellungsosteotomie

Unicompartmental arthroplasty versus high tibial osteotomy

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Knie Journal Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Hemischlitten und gelenknahe tibiale Osteotomien haben sich zu erfolgreichen Standardverfahren in der Behandlung der medialen Kniegelenkarthrose entwickelt. Mit zunehmender Anwendung bei jungen aktiven Patienten erlangen diese knochensparenden Operationen in der Arthrosetherapie eine größere Bedeutung als Alternative zum Oberflächenersatz. Instrumentationen, Implantate und operative Techniken wurden verbessert, sodass mit beiden Verfahren sehr gute funktionelle und Langzeitergebnisse erreicht werden. Der folgende Beitrag gibt bezüglich der Indikation klare Richtlinien und verdeutlicht Vor- und Nachteile beider Techniken bezüglich der klinischen Ergebnisse, der Überlebensrate, Wechseloptionen und Komplikationen. Hierbei wird vor allem auf den medialen Schlitten und die valgisierende tibiale Osteotomie fokussiert.

Abstract

Unicompartmental arthroplasty and high tibial osteotomy have become successful standard procedures in the treatment of medial arthritis of the knee. With a more frequent use in young and active patients, bone-sparing procedures have become more important as an alternative to total knee arthroplasty. The instrumentation, implants and surgical techniques have been improved so that very good functional and long-term results can be achieved with both procedures. This article describes the indications, results and complications of both surgical techniques. The aim is to give clear guidelines for indications. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of hemiarthroplasty and osteotomy are explained regarding clinical results, survival rates, revision options and complications. The focus is on medial unicompartmental arthroplasty and valgus tibial osteotomy.

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

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3

Literatur

  1. Argenson JN et al (2002) In vivo determination of knee kinematics for subjects implanted with a unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 17(8):1049–1054

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Argenson JN, Chevrol-Benkeddache Y, Aubaniac JM (2002) Modern unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with cement: A three to ten-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84(12):2235–2239

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berger RA, Nedeff DD, Barden RM et al (1999) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Clinical experience at 6–10–year follow up. Clin Orthop 367:50–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Berger RA et al (2004) The progression of patellofemoral arthrosis after medial unicompartmental replacement: Results at 11 to 15 years. Clin Orthop 428:92–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Börjesson M, Weidenhielm L, Mattsson E, Olsson E (2005) Gait and clinical measurements in patients with knee osteoarthritis after surgery: A prospective 5‑year follow-up study. Knee 12(2):121–127

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Boissonneault A, Pandit H, Pegg E, Jenkins C, Gill HS, Dodd CA, Gibbons CL, Murray DW (2013) No difference in survivorship after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with or without an intact anterior cruciate ligament. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(11):2480–2486

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bonnin M, Chambat P (2004) Current status of valgus angle, tibial head closing wedge osteotomy in media gonarthrosis. Orthopade 33(2):135–142

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cao Z, Mai X, Wang J, Feng E, Huang Y (2018) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty vs high tibial osteotomy for knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 33(3):952–959

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cartier P, Sanouiller JL, Grelsamer RP (1996) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty surgery: 10-year minimal follow-up period. J Arthroplasty 11(7):782–788

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dettoni F, Bonasia DE, Castoldi F, Bruzzone M, Blonna D, Rossi R (2010) High tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for medial compartment arthrosis of the knee: A review of the literature. Iowa Orthop J 30:131–140

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Efe T, Ahmed G, Heyse TJ, Boudriot U, Timmesfeld N, Fuchs-Winkelmann S, Ishaque B, Lakemeier S, Schofer MD (2011) Closing-wedge high tibial osteotomy: Survival and risk factor analysis at long-term follow up. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 12:46. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-12-46

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Emerson RH Jr, Higgins LL (2008) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the oxford prosthesis in patients with medial compartment arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90(1):118–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fu D, Li G, Chen K, Zhao Y, Hua Y, Cai Z (2013) Comparison of high tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the treatment of unicompartmental osteoarthritis: A meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 28(5):759–765

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Goodfellow J, Kershaw CJ, Benson MK, O’Connor JJ (1988) The Oxford Knee for unicompartimental osteoarthritis. The first 103 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br 70(5):692–701

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gunston PH (1971) Policentric knee arthroplasty: Prosthetic simulation of normal knee movement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 53(2):272–277

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Han SB, Kyung HS, Seo IW, Shin YS (2017) Better clinical outcomes after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty when comparing with high tibial osteotomy. Medicine (Baltimore) 96(50):e9268. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000009268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hube R, Keim M (2007) Minimally invasive implantation in unicondylar arthroplasty. Orthopade 36(12):1093–1099

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hui C, Salmon LJ, Kok A, Williams HA, Hockers N, van der Tempel WM, Chana R, Pinczewski LA (2011) Long-term survival of high tibial osteotomy for medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee. Am J Sports Med 39(1):64–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Insall J, Walker P (1976) Unicondylar knee replacement. Clin Orthop 120:83–85

    Google Scholar 

  20. Insall J, Aglietti PA (1980) Five to seven-year follow up of unicondylar arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 62(8):1329–1337

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Irvarsson I, Giliquist J (1989) Rehabilitation after tibial osteotomy and unicompartimental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 266:139

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kfuri M, Lobenhoffer P (2017) High tibial osteotomy for the correction of varus knee deformity. J Knee Surg 30(5):409–420

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Labek G, Böhler N (2003) Der minimal-invasive Hemischlitten: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen. Orthopade 32:454–460

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Laskin RS (1978) Unicompartment tibiofemoral resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 60(2):182–185

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lobenhoffer P, Agneskirchner JD (2014) Osteotomy around the knee vs. unicondylar knee replacement. Orthopade 43(10):923–929

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Marmor L (1979) Marmor modular knee in unicompartmental disease. Minimum four-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg 61(3):347–353

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. McAuley JP et al (2001) Revision of failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 392:279–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Meek RM, Masri BA, Duncan CP (2004) Minimally invasive unicompartimental knee replacement: Rationale and correct indications. Orthop Clin North Am 35(2):191–200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Niemeyer P, Schmal H, Hauschild O, von Heyden J, Südkamp NP, Köstler W (2010) Open-wedge osteotomy using an internal plate fixator in patients with medial-compartment gonarthritis and varus malalignment: 3‑year results with regard to preoperative arthroscopic and radiographic findings. Arthroscopy 26(12):1607–1616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2010.05.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nwachukwu BU, McCormick FM, Schairer WW, Frank RM, Provencher MT, Roche MW (2014) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus high tibial osteotomy: United States practice patterns for the surgical treatment of unicompartmental arthritis. J Arthroplasty 29(8):1586–1589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2014.04.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Pearse AJ, Hooper GJ, Rothwell A, Frampton C (2010) Survival and functional outcome after revision of a unicompartmental to a total knee replacement: The New Zealand National Joint Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92(4):508–512. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.92B4.22659

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Pearse AJ, Hooper GJ, Rothwell AG, Frampton C (2012) Osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty converted to total knee arthroplasty: Data from the New Zealand Joint Registry. J Arthroplasty 27(10):1827–1831

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Price AJ et al (2001) Rapid recovery after oxford unicompartimental arthroplasty through a short incision. J Arthroplasty 16(8):970–976

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rees JL, Price AJ, Beard DJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2004) Minimally invasive Oxford unicompartimental knee arthroplasty: Functional resuls at 1 year and the effect of surgical inexperience. Knee 11:363–367

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Repicci JA, Eberle RW (1999) Minimally invasive surgical technique for unicondylar knee arthroplasty. J South Orthop Assoc 8(1):20–27

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Romanowski MR, Repicci JA (2002) Minimally invasive unicondylar arthroplasty, eight year follow-up. J Knee Surg 15(1):17–22

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Schröter S, Ateschrang A, Ihle C, Stöckle U, Konstantinidis L, Döbele S (2014) Lateral hinge fractures in open wedge high tibial osteotomy. Orthopade 43(11):1000–1007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Schwartz T, Battish R, Lotke PA (2000) The role of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Semin Arthroplasty 11(4):241–246

    Google Scholar 

  39. Scott RD, Santore RF (1981) Unicondylar unicompartimental replacement of osteoarthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg 63(4):536–554

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Scott RD, Cobb AG, McQuerary FG, Thornhill TS (1991) Unicompartimental knee arthroplasty. 8–12 year follow up evaluation with surviviorship analysis. Clin Orthop 271:96–100

    Google Scholar 

  41. Scuderi GR (2004) Instrumentation for unicondylar knee replacement. In: Scuderi GR, Tria AJ (Hrsg) MIS of the hip and the knee: A clinical perspective. Springer, New York, S 87–104

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Spahn G (2004) Complications in high tibial (medial opening wedge) osteotomy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 124(10):649–653

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Spahn G, Hofmann GO, von Engelhardt LV, Li M, Neubauer H, Klinger HM (2013) The impact of a high tibial valgus osteotomy and unicondylar medial arthroplasty on the treatment for knee osteoarthritis: A meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(1):96–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Sun X, Su Z (2018) A meta-analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty revised to total knee arthroplasty versus primary total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Surg Res 13(1):158

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register 2017

  46. Takeuchi R, Umemoto Y, Aratake M, Bito H, Saito I, Kumagai K, Sasaki Y, Akamatsu Y, Ishikawa H, Koshino T, Saito T (2010) A mid term comparison of open wedge high tibial osteotomy vs unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee. J Orthop Surg Res 5(1):65

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopädische Chirurgie München, OCM-Klinik GmbH, Steiner Str. 6, 81369, München, Deutschland

    R. Hube

  2. Universitätsklinik Jena, Orthopädische Klinik der Waldkliniken Eisenberg, Eisenberg, Deutschland

    G. Matziolis

Authors
  1. R. Hube
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. Matziolis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Hube.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

R. Hube und G. Matziolis geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autoren keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Additional information

Redaktion

W. Petersen, Berlin

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hube, R., Matziolis, G. Unikondylärer Schlitten vs. Umstellungsosteotomie. Knie J. 1, 31–35 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43205-019-00014-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43205-019-00014-2

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation