Abstract
Unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) has well known advantages over total knee replacement (TKR), such as less invasiveness, respect of both cruciate ligaments, better function, and less morbidity. However, the survival rates of UKR are typically inferior to those obtained with TKR. The higher failure rate of the former has been ascribed to the effects of degeneration in other compartments and to polyethylene wear. Despite this history, recent surveys have documented an evident improvement in the survivorship rate probably based on the large diffusion of the UKR and in a consequent improvement in the indications, surgical technique, and prostheses. However, long-term clinical results, which are the hardest to obtain, are needed to confirm the positive short-term experience (Fig. 7.1) [1–3] (unpublished data).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Cartier P, Sanouiller J-L, Greisamer RP (1996) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty surgery: 10-year minimum follow-up period. J Arthroplasty 11:782–8
Marmor L (1993) Unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee with a minimum ten-year follow-up period. Clin Orthop 286:154–9
Romagnoli S, Verde F, Eberle RW (2006) 10 year minimum follow-up of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the allegretto prosthesis. JBJS-BR 88-B Supp_I, 100
Romagnoli S, Morasso V, Bibbiani E (1994) La gonartrosi rotatoria e le protesi monocompartimentali. Minerva Ortop Traumatol 45(10):485–8
Romagnoli S (1996) The unicompartmental knee prosthesis and the rotatory gonarthrosis kinematic. current concept in primary and revision total knee arthroplasty. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 69–83
Romagnoli S, Verde F (2011) Le protesi “mono” in esiti di frattura; La protesi monocompartimentale con ricostruzione del LCA. In: Confalonieri N (ed) La protesi monocompartimentale del ginocchio. Cic Editore
White SH, Ludkowski PF, Goodfellow JW (1991) Anteromedial osteoarthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 73-B:582–6
Ahlback S (1968) Osteoarthrosis of the knee: a radiographic investigation. Acta Radiol Suppl 277:7–72
Romagnoli S, Grappiolo G, Camera A (1998) Indicazioni e limiti delle protesi monocompartimentali. Il ginocchio-Anno XIV-Vol.1
Romagnoli S, Grappiolo G, Ursino N, Broch C (2000) Dexa evaluation of bone remodeling in the proximal tibia after unicompartmental prosthesis. Traumalinc 2:2 Pabst Science Publishers
Murray DW, Carr AJ, Bulstrode CJK (1993) Survival analysis of joint replacement. J Bone Joint Surg (Br)75-B:697–704
Peto R, Pike MC, Armitage P et al (1977) Design and analysis of randomised clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. Br J Cancer 35:1–40
Romagnoli S (2001) The Mini-Incision: More Hype than Help! In Opposition. Current Concepts in Joint Replacement. Presented by Current Concepts Institute, Cleveland, Ohio
Romagnoli S, Bibbiani E, Castelnuovo N, Cusmà G, Verde F (2008) The problem of UKR revisions. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90-B (Supp. I) 182
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Italia
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Romagnoli, S., Verde, F., Zacchetti, S. (2013). Lateral Unicompartmental Knee Replacement: Long-Term Survival Study. In: Confalonieri, N., Romagnoli, S. (eds) Small Implants in Knee Reconstruction. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-2655-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-2655-1_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Milano
Print ISBN: 978-88-470-2654-4
Online ISBN: 978-88-470-2655-1
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)