Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has gained renewed interest in recent years as an alternative to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for limited degenerative disease of the knee. However, recurrence of symptoms may be seen, compromising long-term survivorship. Arthroscopy has been used to for diagnosing and treating symptoms in problematic TKA. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of arthroscopic procedures in symptomatic UKA. We hypothesized that arthroscopy is a viable tool in diagnosing and treating patients with recurrent symptoms after UKA and identifying patients that will benefit from revision surgery. A search of the institution's joint registry was conducted to identify patients who underwent arthroscopy following UKA between 2003 and 2011. Medical records were analyzed for patient demographics and comorbidities. Clinical results following arthroscopy were evaluated using the Oxford Knee Score. All patient radiograph were assessed for component alignment and loosening.Introduction:
Methods:
Bicompartmental knee replacement (BKR) may be an alternative to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for degenerative disease limited to two knee compartments. Most commonly, BKA is a combination of medial compartment and patellofemoral compartment resurfacing. In contrast to TKA, BKA preserves the uninvolved compartment and cruciate ligaments possibly leading to advanced stability and more physiologic knee kinematics. Robotic-assisted systems for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty have shown to provide improved component positioning with dynamic ligament balancing that may improve outcomes of BKA. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of patients undergoing BKA at a single institution by a single surgeon using a robotic-assisted system. A search of the institution's joint registry was conducted to identify patients that underwent robotic-assisted BKA of the patellofemoral compartment and the medial or lateral compartment between December 2009 and April 2012. All medical records were analyzed for patient demographics and comorbidities. The patients were evaluated preoperatively and at 6,12 months and then annually. The patients were contacted by phone when recent follow-up was not available. The radiographic assessment was also undertaken. The orientation of the tibial and femoral implants was assessed radiologically postoperatively. We examined the clinical results with the Oxford Knee Score (OKS)Introduction
Methods
