Objective. To investigate the reasons for revision of Oxford Unicondylar Knee Replacement (UKR). Does insert size used relate to requirement for revision?. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the cases needing revision from a single surgeon consecutive series of 209 ‘Oxford’ UKRs. 10 cases required early (within 2 years) revision. The reasons for revision were investigated. A comparison of cases requiring revision by insert size implanted was made. Results. 10 cases required revision. 2 patients suffered from Sjorgens Syndrome which was undiagnosed at the time of primary surgery and underwent revision for ongoing pain, 2 cases fractured the tibia beneath the implant, 2 were revised for sepsis, and 3 cases were revised for ongoing pain without obvious cause. 1 case was revised for tibial component loosening. A significantly greater proportion of cases in which a size 6 insert was used required revision (4 of 11), compared with size 4 (1 of 44)(p=0.001) or size 5 (0 of 28)(p=0.002), and also compared with size 3 (3 of 31)(p=0.005). In cases where a size 3 insert is measured with this prosthesis, one option is to take a further tibial cut to rather use a size 6 insert. Given the five-fold increase in likelihood for requiring revision found in our series, we would recommend against this step. Conclusion. In conclusion we report a successful series of Oxford unicondylar knees taking early revision surgery as the endpoint. We recommend caution when considering a further cut when initial measurement suggests a size 3 insert, as in our series size 6 inserts showed a 5 fold increase in revision rate when compared to size 3

Introduction. Obesity has been considered a relative contra-indication in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) due to fear of high wear rates, loosening and tibial collapse. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of high body mass index (BMI) on ten-year survivorship and five-year functional outcome after Oxford UKA, a fully congruous mobile bearing design with large contact area and low wear rate. Methods. This prospective study examines a consecutive series of 595 knees (mean age 66 years, range: 33-88) undergoing Oxford UKA with a minimum 5-year follow-up. Patients were divided into three groups; Group I (Normal body weight), BMI <25 (n=171), Group II (overweight), BMI 25- 30 (n=264), and Group III (Obese), BMI ≥30 (n=160). The survivorship and functional outcome (as assessed by change in Oxford Knee Score [DeltaOKS]) and Knee Society Score (KSS) for all three groups were compared. Results. The mean follow-up was 6.3 years. There was no significant difference in the 10-year survivorship between groups (96% for all groups). Although numbers were small there was no significant difference in revision rates for patients with BMI ≥35 (n=1/38). Group III patients had a lower pre-operative OKS and lower post-operative OKS compared to groups I and II, although DeltaOKS was similar (p= .977). At last follow-up the Functional KSS was lower in group III (p=.11), although Objective KSS was not significantly different between groups (p=.954). Conclusion. Oxford UKA can be safely used in obese and morbidly-obese patients. Design features of congruous bearing and large contact area ensure low wear rates. Summary. No significant difference in revision rates noted between groups of increasing body mass index in this prospective study of outcome in patients undergoing medial Oxford unicondylar knee replacement

Introduction: Debate continues regarding the optimal timing of surgery for patients requiring bilateral knee arthroplasty; we reviewed the costs, clinical and functional outcomes of 116 patients undergoing simultaneous or staged bilateral surgery using 3 different prostheses. Method: Data were retrospectively collected from 116 consecutive patients undergoing 232 knee replacements over 10 years, either simultaneously or over 2 hospital admissions (staged). Post-operative complication rate, total cost of treatment (calculated from pros-theses, theatre time, days in hospital and number of clinic attendances) and functional (HSS) score at 1 year were the outcome measures. Results: 54 patients underwent Oxford unicondylar knee replacements, 41 simultaneously, 13 staged; respective mean total costs were £9890 and £13,553 (p< 0.001). 42 patients were treated with AGC prostheses; 14 simultaneously, 28 staged, with respective total costs of £12,187 and £16,920 (p< 0.001). 10 TMK patients had simultaneous surgery (mean total cost £14,812), 10 were staged (£20,191); p< 0.001. For all 3 prostheses, there was no significant difference in complication rate or 1 year functional outcome between simultaneous and staged groups. Discussion: Some authors advocate replacing both knees simultaneously as safe and cost-effective; others report significant increases in medical and surgical morbidity. Our series shows significant cost savings with no increase in complication rate

Oxford medial uni compartmental knee replacement is a common and widely accepted procedure that relies on accurate positioning and alignment of the implants for optimal outcome and longevity. Posterior slope of the tibial base plate has been shown to be an important factor affecting long term survivorship. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether navigation increased the accuracy of Oxford knee replacements using the posterior slope of the tibial component as an index measure. The posterior slope of tibial trays from 58 sequential Oxford medial unicondylar knee replacements over a two year period was checked on standard lateral x-rays against the recommended range. There were 12 cases in the navigated and 46 in the conventional group across six Orthopaedic firms. The mean posterior slope for navigated and conventional implantations was 4.75 and 3.3 degrees respectively with the difference not being statistically significant. However, when considering the data for low volume surgeons, the mean posterior slope with and without navigation was 4.75 and 1.83 degrees respectively which was significant with a p value of 0.017. Navigation was also found to significantly decrease the chance of implanting the knee with the posterior slope outside the acceptable range (p=0.024). In both analyses the navigated cohort had a narrower data spread and fewer outliers compared to the conventional group. No other factors were found to significantly correlate with the posterior slope. The study suggests that navigation might help low volume surgeons in increasing the accuracy and decreasing the incidence of extreme variations from the desirable range of implant positioning for unicompartmental knee replacements