Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Revision of 33 unicompartmental knee prostheses using total knee arthroplasty: strategy and results

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was twofold: to evaluate the radiological and clinical results of 33 total knee arthroplasties (TKA) implanted between January 1993 and March 2005, to replace failed medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), and to develop a strategy to deal with bone defects in the tibial plateau. Failure was due to: tibial loosening (15 cases), femoral loosening (five cases), femoral and tibial loosening (two cases), polyethylene wear (five cases), lateral compartment osteoarthritis (two cases), patellofemoral osteoarthritis (two cases), laxity and PE dislocation (one case), and sepsis in one case. In 12 cases the tibial bone defect was filled with a metallic wedge, in seven we used an allograft (femoral head), and in one we used both. We report the results of 27 cases (five patients died and one was lost to follow-up). The mean follow-up was 73±41.7 months (range, 8–153) and the global IKS score was 166.72±21.3 points (range, 128–200). X-rays of the eight allografts showed osteointegration in all cases and no radiolucency was noted.

Résumé

Le propos de cette étude a deux objets, d’une part d’évaluer les résultats de 33 prothèses totales du genou, réalisées entre janvier 1993 et mars 2005, mises en place pour échec de prothèses uni-compartimentales, deuxièmement de développer une stratégie permettant de compenser les défects osseux des plateaux tibiaux. L’échec de ces prothèses était dû à un descellement tibial (15 cas), fémoral (5 cas), fémoral et tibial (2 cas), d’usure du polyéthylène (5 cas), d’arthrose du compartiment contro-latéral externe (2 cas), d’arthrose fémoro-patellaire (2 cas), un cas de laxité avec dislocation prothétique (1 cas), enfin un cas de sepsis. Dans 12 cas le défect tibial osseux a été compensé par une cale métallique et dans 7 cas nous avons utilisé une allogreffe de tête fémorale. Enfin dans un cas nous avons utilisé à la fois une cale et une greffe. Nous rapportons les résultats de 27 cas, 5 patients étant décédés et un perdu de vue. Le suivi moyen a été de 73+/- 41,7 mois, (8 à 153 mois), le score IKS global de 166,72,+/- 21,3 points (128 à 200). Les résultats radiographiques ont montré pour les 8 allogreffes qu’elles avaient été ostéointégrées sans liseré.

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Argenson JN, Komistek RD, Aubaniac JM, Dennis DA, Northcut EJ, Anderson T, Agostini S (2002) In vivo determination of knee kinematics for subjects implanted with a unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 17:1049–1054

    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 84:2235–2239

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Barrett WP, Scott RD (1987) Revision of failed unicondylar knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69:1328–1335

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Böhm I, Landsiedl F (2000) Revision surgery after failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a study of 35 cases. J Arthroplasty 15:982–989

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bonnin M, Deschamps G, Neyret P, Chambat P (2000) Revision in non-infected total knee arthroplasty: an analysis of 69 consecutive cases. Rev Chir Orthop 86:694–706

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cameron HU, Jung YB (1988) Clinical results with an uncemented plastic tibial component in unicompartmental knee replacement. Can J Surg 31:256–258

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Chakrabarty G, Newman JH, Ackroyd CE (1998) Revision of unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee: clinical and technical considerations. J Arthroplasty 13:191–196

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Chatain F, Richard A, Deschamps G, Chambat P, Neyret P (2004) Revision total knee arthroplasty after unicompartmental femorotibial prosthesis: 54 cases. Rev Chir Orthop 90:49–54

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Engh GA, Ammeen DJ (1999) Bone loss with revision total knee arthroplasty: defect classification and alternatives for reconstruction. Instr Course Lect 48:167–175

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gill T, Schemitsch EH, Brick GW, Thornhill TS (1995) Revision total knee arthroplasty after failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty or high tibial osteotomy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 321:10–18

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2004) Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 423:161–164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2004) Posterior slope of the tibial implant and the outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:506–511

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Iorio R, Healy WL (2003) Unicompartmental arthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:1351–1364

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jackson M, Sarangi PP, Newman JH (1994) Revision total knee arthroplasty: comparison of outcome following primary proximal tibial osteotomy or unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 9:539–542

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kozinn SC, Scott RD (1988) Surgical treatment of unicompartmental degenerative arthritis of the knee. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 14:545–564

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Lai CH, Rand JA (1993) Revision of failed unicompartmental total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 287:193–201

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Levine WN, Ozuna RM, Scott RD, Thornhill (1996) Conversion of failed modern unicompartmental arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 11:797–801

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lindstrand A, Stenstrom A, Lewold S (1992) Multicenter study of unicompartmental knee revision. PCA, Marmor, and St Georg compared in 3777 cases of arthrosis. Acta Orthop Scand 63:256–259

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Marmor L (1988) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Ten to 13 year follow up study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 226:14–20

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. McAuley JP, Engh GA, Ammeen DJ (2001) Revision of failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 392:279–282

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Miller M, Benjamin JB, Marson B, Hollstein S (2002) The effect of implant constraint on results of conversion of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty. Orthopaedics 25:1353–1357

    Google Scholar 

  22. Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ (1998) The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:983–989

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Neyret P, Deroche P, Deschamps G, Dejour H (1992) Total knee replacement after valgus tibial osteotomy: technical problems. Rev Chir Orthop 78:438–448

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Padgett DE, Stern SH, Insall JN (1991) Revision total knee arthroplasty for failed unicompartmental replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 73:186–190

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Parvizi J, Hanssen AD, Spangehl MJ (2004) Total knee arthroplasty following proximal tibial osteotomy: risk factors for failure. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:474–479

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rougraff BT, Heck DA, Gibson AE (1991) A comparison of tricompartmental and unicompartmental arthroplasty for the treatment of gonarthrosis. Clin Orthop 273:157–164

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sport Traumatology, Grenoble South Teaching Hospital, 38130, Échirolles, France

    Dominique Saragaglia, Gilles Estour & Charbel Nemer

  2. Faculté de Médecine (UJF), Domaine de la Merci, 38700, La Tronche, France

    Pierre-Emmanuel Colle

Authors
  1. Dominique Saragaglia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gilles Estour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Charbel Nemer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pierre-Emmanuel Colle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominique Saragaglia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Saragaglia, D., Estour, G., Nemer, C. et al. Revision of 33 unicompartmental knee prostheses using total knee arthroplasty: strategy and results. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 33, 969–974 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0585-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0585-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation