Aims. In-hospital length of stay (LOS) and
Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is a technically challenging and costly procedure. It is well-documented that primary TKA (pTKA) have better survivorship than rTKA; however, we were unable to identify any studies explicitly investigating previous rTKA as a risk factor for failure following rTKA. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes following rTKA between patients undergoing index rTKA and those who had been previously revised. This retrospective, observational study reviewed patients who underwent unilateral, aseptic rTKA at an academic orthopaedic speciality hospital between June 2011 and April 2020 with > one-year of follow-up. Patients were dichotomized based on whether this was their first revision procedure or not. Patient demographics, surgical factors, postoperative outcomes, and re-revision rates were compared between the groups.Aims
Methods
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. A total of 168 patients (201 knees) underwent medial UKA with
the Oxford Partial Knee Twin-Peg. These patients were compared with
a randomly selected group of 177 patients (189 knees) with primary
Vanguard TKA. Patient demographics, Knee Society (KS) scores and
range of movement (ROM) were compared between the two cohorts. Additionally,
revision, re-operation and manipulation under anaesthesia rates
were analysed.Aims
Patients and Methods