Aims. This systematic review aims to compare the precision of component positioning, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, survivorship, cost-effectiveness, and learning curves of MAKO robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RAUKA) with manual medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (mUKA). Methods. Searches of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar were performed in November 2021 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-­Analysis statement. Search terms included “robotic”, “unicompartmental”, “knee”, and “arthroplasty”. Published clinical research articles reporting the learning curves and cost-effectiveness of MAKO RAUKA, and those comparing the component precision, functional outcomes, survivorship, or complications with mUKA, were included for analysis. Results. A total of 179 articles were identified from initial screening, of which 14 articles satisfied the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. The papers analyzed include one on learning curve, five on implant positioning, six on functional outcomes, five on complications, six on survivorship, and three on cost. The learning curve was six cases for operating time and zero for precision. There was consistent evidence of more precise implant positioning with MAKO RAUKA. Meta-analysis demonstrated lower overall complication rates associated with MAKO RAUKA (OR 2.18 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06 to 4.49); p = 0.040) but no difference in re-intervention, infection, Knee Society Score (KSS; mean difference 1.64 (95% CI -3.00 to 6.27); p = 0.490), or Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score (mean difference -0.58 (95% CI -3.55 to 2.38); p = 0.700). MAKO RAUKA was shown to be a cost-effective procedure, but this was directly related to volume. Conclusion. MAKO RAUKA was associated with improved precision of component positioning but was not associated with improved PROMs using the KSS and WOMAC scores. Future longer-term studies should report functional outcomes, potentially using scores with minimal ceiling effects and survival to assess whether the improved precision of MAKO RAUKA results in better outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(5):541–548

Aims. The interest in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) for medial osteoarthritis has increased rapidly but the long-term follow-up of the Oxford UKAs has yet to be analysed in non-designer centres. We have examined our ten- to 15-year clinical and radiological follow-up data for the Oxford Phase III UKAs. Patients and Methods. Between January 1999 and January 2005 a total of 138 consecutive Oxford Phase III arthroplasties were performed by a single surgeon in 129 patients for medial compartment osteoarthritis (71 right and 67 left knees, mean age 72.0 years (47 to 91), mean body mass index 28.2 (20.7 to 52.2)). Both clinical data and radiographs were prospectively recorded and obtained at intervals. Of the 129 patients, 32 patients (32 knees) died, ten patients (12 knees) were not able to take part in the final clinical and radiological assessment due to physical and mental conditions, but via telephone interview it was confirmed that none of these ten patients (12 knees) had a revision of the knee arthroplasty. One patient (two knees) was lost to follow-up. Results. The mean follow-up was 11.7 years (10 to 15). A total of 11 knees (8%) were revised. The survival at 15 years with revision for any reason as the endpoint was 90.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 85.2 to 96.0) and revision related to the prosthesis was 99.3% (95% CI 97.9 to 100). The mean total Knee Society Score was 47 (0 to 80) pre-operatively and 81 (30 to 100) at latest follow-up. The mean Oxford Knee Score was 19 (12 to 40) pre-operatively and 42 (28 to 55) at final follow-up. Radiolucency beneath the tibial component occurred in 22 of 81 prostheses (27.2%) without evidence of loosening. Conclusion. This study supports the use of UKA in medial compartment osteoarthritis with excellent long-term functional and radiological outcomes with an excellent 15-year survival rate. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(10 Suppl B):41–7

There is a large amount of evidence available about the relative merits of unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty (UKA and TKA). Based on the same evidence, different people draw different conclusions and as a result, there is great variability in the usage of UKA.

The revision rate of UKA is much higher than TKA and so some surgeons conclude that UKA should not be performed. Other surgeons believe that the main reason for the high revision rate is that UKA is easy to revise and, therefore, the threshold for revision is low. They also believe that UKA has many advantages over TKA such as a faster recovery, lower morbidity and mortality and better function. They therefore conclude that UKA should be undertaken whenever appropriate.

The solution to this argument is to minimise the revision rate of UKA, thereby addressing the main disadvantage of UKA. The evidence suggests that this will be achieved if surgeons use UKA for at least 20% of their knee arthroplasties and use implants that are appropriate for these broad indications.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B(10 Suppl A):3–8.

The cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement has been demonstrated to have superior fixation on radiographs and a similar early complication rate compared with the cemented version. However, a small number of cases have come to our attention where, after an apparently successful procedure, the tibial component subsides into a valgus position with an increased posterior slope, before becoming well-fixed. We present the clinical and radiological findings of these six patients and describe their natural history and the likely causes. Two underwent revision in the early post-operative period, and in four the implant stabilised and became well-fixed radiologically with a good functional outcome.

This situation appears to be avoidable by minor modifications to the operative technique, and it appears that it can be treated conservatively in most patients.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:345–9.

Aims. The aim of this study was to conduct a cross-sectional, observational cohort study of patients presenting for revision of a total hip, or total or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, to understand current routes to revision surgery and explore differences in symptoms, healthcare use, reason for revision, and the revision surgery (surgical time, components, length of stay) between patients having regular follow-up and those without. Methods. Data were collected from participants and medical records for the 12 months prior to revision. Patients with previous revision, metal-on-metal articulations, or hip hemiarthroplasty were excluded. Participants were retrospectively classified as ‘Planned’ or ‘Unplanned’ revision. Multilevel regression and propensity score matching were used to compare the two groups. Results. Data were analyzed from 568 patients, recruited in 38 UK secondary care sites between October 2017 and October 2018 (43.5% male; mean (SD) age 71.86 years (9.93); 305 hips, 263 knees). No significant inclusion differences were identified between the two groups. For hip revision, time to revision > ten years (odds ratio (OR) 3.804, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.353 to 10.694), p = 0.011), periprosthetic fracture (OR 20.309, 95% CI (4.574 to 90.179), p < 0.001), and dislocation (OR 12.953, 95% CI (4.014 to 41.794), p < 0.001), were associated with unplanned revision. For knee, there were no associations with route to revision. Revision after ten years was more likely for those who were younger at primary surgery, regardless of route to revision. No significant differences in cost outcomes, length of surgery time, and access to a health professional in the year prior to revision were found between the two groups. When periprosthetic fractures, dislocations, and infections were excluded, healthcare use was significantly higher in the unplanned revision group. Conclusion. Differences between characteristics for patients presenting for planned and unplanned revision are minimal. Although there was greater healthcare use in those having unplanned revision, it appears unlikely that routine orthopaedic review would have detected many of these issues. It may be safe to disinvest in standard follow-up provided there is rapid access to orthopaedic review. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(1):59–67

Aims. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a bone-preserving treatment option for osteoarthritis localized to a single compartment in the knee. The success of the procedure is sensitive to patient selection and alignment errors. Robotic arm-assisted UKA provides technological assistance to intraoperative bony resection accuracy, which is thought to improve ligament balancing. This paper presents the five-year outcomes of a comparison between manual and robotically assisted UKAs. Methods. The trial design was a prospective, randomized, parallel, single-centre study comparing surgical alignment in patients undergoing UKA for the treatment of medial compartment osteoarthritis (ISRCTN77119437). Participants underwent surgery using either robotic arm-assisted surgery or conventional manual instrumentation. The primary outcome measure (surgical accuracy) has previously been reported, and, along with secondary outcomes, were collected at one-, two-, and five-year timepoints. Analysis of five-year results and longitudinal analysis for all timepoints was performed to compare the two groups. Results. Overall, 104 (80%) patients of the original 130 who received surgery were available at five years (55 robotic, 49 manual). Both procedures reported successful results over all outcomes. At five years, there were no statistical differences between the groups in any of the patient reported or clinical outcomes. There was a lower reintervention rate in the robotic arm-assisted group with 0% requiring further surgery compared with six (9%) of the manual group requiring additional surgical intervention (p < 0.001). Conclusion. This study has shown excellent clinical outcomes in both groups with no statistical or clinical differences in the patient-reported outcome measures. The notable difference was the lower reintervention rate at five years for roboticarm-assisted UKA when compared with a manual approach. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1088–1095

Aims. To compare the gait of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients with healthy controls, using a machine-learning approach. Patients and Methods. 145 participants (121 healthy controls, 12 patients with cruciate-retaining TKA, and 12 with mobile-bearing medial UKA) were recruited. The TKA and UKA patients were a minimum of 12 months post-operative, and matched for pattern and severity of arthrosis, age, and body mass index. . Participants walked on an instrumented treadmill until their maximum walking speed was reached. Temporospatial gait parameters, and vertical ground reaction force data, were captured at each speed. Oxford knee scores (OKS) were also collected. An ensemble of trees algorithm was used to analyse the data: 27 gait variables were used to train classification trees for each speed, with a binary output prediction of whether these variables were derived from a UKA or TKA patient. Healthy control gait data was then tested by the decision trees at each speed and a final classification (UKA or TKA) reached for each subject in a majority voting manner over all gait cycles and speeds. Top walking speed was also recorded. Results. 92% of the healthy controls were classified by the decision tree as a UKA, 5% as a TKA, and 3% were unclassified. There was no significant difference in OKS between the UKA and TKA patients (p = 0.077). Top walking speed in TKA patients (1.6 m/s; 1.3 to 2.1) was significantly lower than that of both the UKA group (2.2 m/s; 1.8 to 2.7) and healthy controls (2.2 m/s; 1.5 to 2.7; p < 0.001). . Conclusion. UKA results in a more physiological gait compared with TKA, and a higher top walking speed. This difference in function was not detected by the OKS. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(10 Suppl B):16–21

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of robotic arm-assisted bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) with conventional mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) during the first six weeks and at one year postoperatively.

Aims

A comprehensive classification for coronal lower limb alignment with predictive capabilities for knee balance would be beneficial in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This paper describes the Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification and examines its utility in preoperative soft tissue balance prediction, comparing kinematic alignment (KA) to mechanical alignment (MA).

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare robotic arm-assisted bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) with conventional mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in order to determine the changes in the anatomy of the knee and alignment of the lower limb following surgery.

Aims

There has been a recent resurgence in interest in combined partial knee arthroplasty (PKA) as an alternative to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The varied terminology used to describe these procedures leads to confusion and ambiguity in communication between surgeons, allied health professionals, and patients. A standardized classification system is required for patient safety, accurate clinical record-keeping, clear communication, correct coding for appropriate remuneration, and joint registry data collection.

Aims

Since redesign of the Oxford phase III mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) femoral component to a twin-peg design, there has not been a direct comparison to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Thus, we explored differences between the two cohorts.

Aims

The aim of this to study was to compare the previously unreported long-term survival outcome of the Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) performed by trainee surgeons and consultants.

Aims

An evidence-based radiographic Decision Aid for meniscal-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been developed and this study investigates its performance at an independent centre.

Partial knee arthroplasty (PKA), either medial or lateral unicompartmental knee artroplasty (UKA) or patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) are a good option in suitable patients and have the advantages of reduced operative trauma, preservation of both cruciate ligaments and bone stock, and restoration of normal kinematics within the knee joint. However, questions remain concerning long-term survival. The goal of this review article was to present the long-term results of medial and lateral UKA, PFA and combined compartmental arthroplasty for multicompartmental disease. Medium- and long-term studies suggest reasonable outcomes at ten years with survival greater than 95% in UKA performed for medial osteoarthritis or osteonecrosis, and similarly for lateral UKA, particularly when fixed-bearing implants are used. Disappointing long-term outcomes have been observed with the first generation of patellofemoral implants, as well as early Bi-Uni (ie, combined medial and lateral UKA) or Bicompartmental (combined UKA and PFA) implants due to design and fixation issues. Promising short- and med-term results with the newer generations of PFAs and bicompartmental arthroplasties will require long-term confirmation.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B(10 Suppl A):9–15.

Aims

Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is associated with successful outcomes in carefully selected patient cohorts. We hypothesised that severity and location of patellofemoral cartilage lesions significantly influences functional outcome after Oxford medial compartmental knee arthroplasty.

Aims

Approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2004, the Phase III Oxford Medial Partial Knee is used to treat anteromedial osteoarthritis (AMOA) in patients with an intact anterior cruciate ligament. This unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is relatively new in the United States, and therefore long-term American results are lacking.