Introduction: Most unicompartmental knee replacements (UKRs) employ cement for fixation of the prosthetic components to the bone. The information in the literature about the relative merits of cemented and cementless UKR is contradictory, with some favouring cementless fixation while others favouring cemented fixation. There is concern about the radiolucency which frequently develops around the tibial component with cemented fixations. The exact cause of the occurrence of radiolucency is unknown but according to some, it may suggest suboptimal fixation.

Method: Following ethical approval, 62 patients with medial OA were randomised to receive either cemented (n=31) or cementless components (n=31). All patients underwent identical surgical procedure with either a cemented or cementless Oxford UKR. Patients were assessed clinically and radiologically. The x-rays were taken with an image intensifier (I.I.). The position of the I.I. was adjusted until it was perfectly aligned with the tibial bone-implant interface thereby allowing accurate assessment of presence and extent of the radiolucency.

Results: The patients in the two groups were well matched. There was no significant difference in the clinical scores between the two groups. The mean OKS for the cemented group was 40 (± 8.3) and 42 (± 4.6) for cementless group. Narrow radiolucent lines were seen at the bone-implant interfaces of 75% of the cemented tibial components; partial in 43% and complete in 32%. In the cementless implants, partial radiolucencies were seen in 7% and complete radiolucencies in none. The differences are statistically highly significant (p< 0.0001) and imply satisfactory bone ingrowth into the cementless implants.

Conclusions: The method of fixation influences the incidence of radiolucency. With identical designs, no patient with cementless components developed any complete radiolucency. The observation raises the question as to whether cementless rather than cemented components should be routinely used for UKR.

Introduction and Aims A randomised controlled trial (RCT) and a multi-centre unilateral cohort study were performed as part of the stepwise introduction of a new mobile bearing knee. The aim was to ensure that outcome for the new device was at least as good as that for an established fixed bearing device. This paper presents three year follow up of the published one year results. Instability and prevalence of “clicking” from the joint were examined in detail.

Method 1. A multi-centre RCT of patients undergoing bilateral knee replacement compared functional outcome between two different prostheses, the new mobile bearing device (TMK) and an established fixed bearing device (AGC). 2. A separate multi-centre cohort of 166 patients who had undergone a unilateral mobile bearing procedure at least six months previously was used to assess complication rate and corroborate any findings from the bilateral trial. Outcome measures included Oxford Knee Scores, American Knee Society ratings and complication rate.

Results The bilateral trial revealed no significant differences in outcome between the two devices. Revision rate for all (199) mobile bearing knees was less than 2%. The mean Oxford Knee Score for outcome for all mobile bearing knees was 37.1 ± 10.1. About 7% of patients reported instability. Clicking was more common in the TMK (48%) than in the AGC (30%) and was reported as a problem in 16% of TMK’s in the cohort study. However, clicking was unrelated to outcome score in both studies.

Conclusion At three years, the mobile bearing device was as good as the fixed bearing device. There was a relatively high prevalence of “clicking” in the TMK but the cause remains unclear. Furthermore, the symptom was not associated with poor functional outcome. The bilateral RCT and cohort study allows assessment of function and potential problems. It provides rigourous scientific justification for the introduction and early assessment of new implants.

When the Oxford unicompartmental meniscal bearing arthroplasty (UCA) is used in the lateral compartment of the knee 10% of the bearings dislocate. An in-vitro cadaveric study was performed to investigate if the anatomy and joint geometry of the lateral compartment was a contributory factor in bearing dislocation. More specifically, the study investigated if the soft tissue tension of the lateral compartment, as determined by the length of the lateral collateral ligament (LCL), was related to bearing dislocation. A change in length of greater than 2 mm is sufficient to allow the bearing to dislocate.

The Vicon Motion Analysis System (Oxford Metrics, Oxford, UK) was used to assess length changes in the LCL of seven cadaveric knees. Measurements were made of the LCL length through knee flexion and of the change in LCL length when a varus force was applied at a fixed flexion angle. Measurements were made in the normal knee and with the knee implanted with the Oxford prosthesis.

In the intact knee the mean LCL change was 5.5mm (8%) over the flexion range. After implantation with the Oxford UCA the mean change in length was only 1 mm (1%). There was a significant difference in the LCL length at 90° (p=0.03) and 135° (p=0.01) of knee flexion compared to the intact knee. When a varus force was applied the LCL length change of the intact knee (5.4 mm) was significantly different (p=0.02) to that of the knee with the prosthesis implanted (2.7 mm)

This study used a new method to dynamically measure LCL length. It found that after implantation of the Oxford lateral UCA the LCL remains isometric over the flexion range and does not slacken in flexion as it in the normal knee. This would suggest that the soft tissue tension was adequate to contain the bearing within the joint.

However, when a varus force was applied the LCL did not sufficiently resist a displacing force producing an LCL length change greater than 2 mm.

The evidence provided by this study is contradictory. The “lack of change in LCL length through flexion” suggests that the ligament remains tight through range and is unlikely to allow dislocation. However, the amount of distraction possible when an adducting moment is applied is sufficient to allow bearing dislocation. The length tension properties of the lateral structures are therefore implicated in the mechanism of dislocation.

Purpose: As part of the step-wise introduction of a meniscal-bearing total knee replacement (Oxford TMK) we needed to know, before proceeding to longer term studies, whether its early clinical results were at least as good as those of an established fixed bearing device (AGC).

Material and Methods: With ethical approval, patients requiring bilateral knee replacement for osteoarthritis consented to have the operations under one anaesthetic using one of each prosthesis; to accept random choice of knee; and to remain ignorant which side was which. American Knee Society Scores, Oxford Knee Scores, ROM and pain scores were to be recorded preoperatively and at one year. By January 2001, 40 patients had reached one year and data is available for 36.

Results: Preoperatively there was no difference between the two knees. One patient died in the peri-operative period.

Results at one year (TMK first): AKSS(Knee) 91.6 / 84.1 (p=0.003), OKS 39.8 / 37.6 (p=0.006), ROM 104 / 104 (p=0.364), Pain (AKSS) 47.3 / 41.7 (p=0.01), Pain (OKS) 3.5 / 2.9 (p=0.006).

Conclusion: The TMK performed as well as the AGC. Its AKSS, OKS and pain scores were significantly better. We believe this controlled, blinded trial is the first to have compared the function of a new knee prosthesis with a standard implant before marketing; and the first to have demonstrated a significant clinical advantage for a meniscal-bearing over a fixed bearing TKR. The comparison of bilateral implants in the same patient can reveal significant differences while putting at risk many fewer subjects than would be needed for a classical twocohort RCT.