Aims. The optimal bearing surface design for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of fixed-bearing (FB) and mobile-bearing (MB) UKAs from a single high-volume institution. Methods. Prospectively collected data were reviewed for all primary cemented medial UKAs performed by seven surgeons from January 2006 to December 2022. A total of 2,999 UKAs were identified, including 2,315 FB and 684 MB cases. The primary outcome measure was implant survival. Secondary outcomes included 90-day and cumulative complications, reoperations, component revisions, conversion arthroplasties, range of motion, and patient-reported outcome measures. Overall mean age at surgery was 65.7 years (32.9 to 94.3), 53.1% (1,593/2,999) of UKAs were implanted in female patients, and demographics between groups were similar (p > 0.05). The mean follow-up for all UKAs was 3.7 years (0.0 to 15.6). Results. Using revision for any reason as an endpoint, five-year survival for FB UKAs was 97.2% (95% CI 96.4 to 98.1) compared to 96.0% for MB (95% CI 94.1 to 97.9; p = 0.008). The FB group experienced fewer component revisions (14/2,315, 0.6% vs 12/684, 1.8%; p < 0.001) and conversion arthroplasties (38/2315, 1.6% vs 24/684, 3.5%; p < 0.001). A greater number of MB UKAs underwent revision due to osteoarthritis progression (FB = 21/2,315, 0.9% vs MB = 16/684, 2.3%; p = 0.003). In the MB group, 12 (1.8%) subjects experienced bearing dislocations which required revision surgery. There were 15 early periprosthetic tibia fractures (0.6%) in the FB group compared to 0 for MB (p = 0.035). Conclusion. In similar patient populations, FB UKAs demonstrated slightly higher survival than a commonly used MB design. Adverse event profiles differed by bearing type, with an increased risk of bearing dislocation and OA progression with MB designs, and early periprosthetic tibia fractures for FB designs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(9):916–923

Introduction. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) offers significant advantages over total knee arthroplasty (TKA) but is reported to have higher revision rates in joint registries. In both the New Zealand and the UK national registry the revision rate of cementless UKR is less than cementless. It is not clear whether this is because the cementless is better or because more experienced surgeons, who tend to get better results are using cementless. We aim to use registry data to compare cemented and cementless UKA outcomes, matching for surgical experience and other factors. Methods. We performed a retrospective observational study using National Joint Registry (NJR) data on 10,836 propensity matched Oxford UKAs (5418 cemented and 5418 cementless) between 2004 and 2015. Logistic regression was utilized to calculate propensity scores to match the cemented and cementless groups for multiple confounders using a one to one ratio. Standardised mean differences were used before and after matching to assess for any covariate imbalances. The outcomes studied were implant survival, reasons for revision and patient survival. The endpoint for implant survival was revision surgery (any component removal or exchange). Cumulative patient and implant survival rates were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Patients not undergoing revision or death were censored on the study end date. The study endpoints implant and patient survival were compared between cemented and cementless groups using Cox regression models with a robust variance estimator. Results. The 5-year implant survival for cemented and cementless Oxford UKA were 95.4% (95%CI 94.6–96.1%) and 96.5% (95%CI 95.8–97.1%) respectively. Implant revision rates were significantly lower in cementless Oxford UKA than cemented, HR 0.8 (CI 0.64–0.99); (p=0.04). The most common reasons for revision in the cemented Oxford UKA group were aseptic loosening (n=44, 0.8%), pain (n=37, 0.7%) and osteoarthritis progression (n=37, 0.7%) compared with osteoarthritis progression (n=28, 0.5%), pain (n=24, 0.4%), aseptic loosening (n=23,0.4%) in the cementless group. Patient survival 5-year survival rates for cemented and cementless Oxford UKA were 96.1% (95%CI 95.2–96.9) and 96.3% (95%CI 95.4–97.1) respectively and were not significantly different HR 0.91 (95%CI 0.71–1.15); (p = 0.42). Conclusion. This is the first study comparing the outcomes of the cemented and cementless UKA from the largest arthroplasty register in the world. Our work shows the cementless Oxford UKA has superior implant survivorship to the cemented implant at 5 years follow up. Cementless implants also had half the risk of requiring revision for aseptic loosening, which may be related to the decreased incidence of tibial radiolucent lines with cementless fixation. Patient survival did not significantly differ between the implant types

Introduction. Robotic technology has been applied to unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) in order to improve surgical precision in prosthetic component placement, restore knee anatomic surfaces, and provide a more physiologic ligament tensioning throughout the knee range of motion. Recent literature has demonstrated high reliability of robotic-arm assisted UKA in component placement and executing a soft-tissue tensioning plan, with excellent short-term survivorship. Few studies have investigated survivorship and patients' satisfaction at longer follow-ups. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to determine the survivorship, clinical results and patients' satisfaction of robotic-arm assisted UKAs at a mid-term follow-up, with a minimum of 5 years of follow-up. Methods. The present retrospective study includes 252 patients (260 knees) who underwent robotic-arm assisted fixed bearing metal backed UKAs at a single centre between April 2011 and July 2013. The mean age at surgery was 66.2 years (SD 8.6). Post-operatively, patients were administered the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS) and asked about their satisfaction level after knee surgery (grade from 1 to 5). Post-operative complications were recorded. Failure mechanisms, revisions and reoperations were also assessed. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were calculated, considering reoperation for all causes and revision as the events of interest. Results. A total of 223 patients (231 robotic-arm assisted UKAs) were assessed at a mean follow-up of 5.8 years post-operatively (88.5% follow-up rate, min. 60 months, max. 87 months). In 219 cases, a medial robotic-arm assisted UKA was implanted, in 12 cases a lateral implant was performed. Five medial robotic-arm assisted UKAs were revised, resulting in a survivorship of 98% (C.I. 96.0%–99.1%). One case underwent revision for prosthetic joint infection, one for tibial aseptic loosening, one for post-traumatic tibial plateau fracture, and two for unexplained pain. No lateral robotic-arm assisted UKAs were revised, resulting in a survivorship of 100%. On average, the FJS and the satisfaction level resulted 75.6 (SD 26.1) and 4.2 (SD 1.0) in medial UKAs, and 81.7 (SD 15.3) and 4.4 (SD 0.8) in lateral UKAs, respectively. In medial UKAs 83% of the examined cohort reported good/excellent FJS outcomes, while 92% of the lateral UKA patients had good/excellent FJS results. In medial UKAs, male patients resulted to have better FJS (p<0.01) and higher satisfaction level (p<0.03) compared to female patients, while no outcome differences were reported in patients with BMI>30 and among different age groups. Given the small number of lateral UKAs included in the present patients' cohort, no statistical analysis was performed on this group. Conclusion. In the present study, survivorship and clinical outcomes of a large cohort of 223 patients undergoing medial and lateral robotic-arm assisted UKAs were assessed at a mean of 5.8 years of follow-up. The overall survivorship was found to be 98%, with unexplained knee pain as the most common reason for UKA revision. The present study shows that robotic-arm assisted UKA patients had lower revision rates for aseptic loosening and osteoarthritis progression compared to conventional UKA at mid-term follow-up, as reported in the literature. The good post-operative clinical scores highlight the efficacy of robotic-arm assisted UKA in restoring knee function and relieving pain. For figures, tables, or references, please contact authors directly

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe the pattern of revision indications for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and any change to this pattern for UKA patients over the last 20 years, and to investigate potential associations to changes in surgical practice over time.

Aims

Adenosine, lidocaine, and Mg²⁺ (ALM) therapy exerts differential immuno-inflammatory responses in males and females early after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR). Our aim was to investigate sex-specific effects of ALM therapy on joint tissue repair and recovery 28 days after surgery.

Aims

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is one option in the treatment of isolated unicompartmental advanced osteoarthritis (OA). While long-term results exist for medial mobile-bearing (MB) UKA, evidence regarding lateral MB-UKA is still limited. The Oxford Domed Lateral (ODL) implant aims to reduce the bearing dislocation rate in lateral MB-UKA through enhanced bearing entrapment. However, the long-term performance of this implant remains unclear. This study evaluated the long-term survival and clinical outcomes of the ODL in a non-designer centre.

Aims

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has higher revision rates than total knee arthroplasty (TKA). As revision of UKA may be less technically demanding than revision TKA, UKA patients with poor functional outcomes may be more likely to be offered revision than TKA patients with similar outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare clinical thresholds for revisions between TKA and UKA using revision incidence and patient-reported outcomes, in a large, matched cohort at early, mid-, and late-term follow-up.

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate cartilaginous patellotrochlear congruence and patellofemoral alignment parameters after deepening trochleoplasty in severe trochlear dysplasia.

Aims. This study reports on the medium- to long-term implant survivorship and patient-reported outcomes for the Avon patellofemoral joint (PFJ) arthroplasty. Patients and Methods. A total of 558 Avon PFJ arthroplasties in 431 patients, with minimum two-year follow-up, were identified from a prospective database. Patient-reported outcomes and implant survivorship were analyzed, with follow-up of up to 18 years. Results. Outcomes were recorded for 483 implants (368 patients), representing an 86% follow-up rate. The median postoperative Oxford Knee Score (0 to 48 scale) was 35 (interquartile range (IQR) 25.5 to 43) and the median Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC, 0 to 100 scale) was 35 (IQR 25 to 53) at two years. There were 105 revisions, 61 (58%) for progression of osteoarthritis. All documented revisions were to primary knee systems without augmentation. The implant survival rate was 77.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 72.4 to 81.7, number at risk 204) at ten years and 67.4% (95% CI 72.4 to 81.7 number at risk 45) at 15 years. Regression analysis of explanatory data variable showed that cases performed in the last nine years had improved survival compared with the first nine years of the cohort, but the individual operating surgeon had the strongest effect on survivorship. Conclusion. Satisfactory long-term results can be obtained with the Avon PFJ arthroplasty, with maintenance of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), satisfactory survival, and low rates of loosening and wear. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1162–7

Objectives. Our objective in this article is to test the hypothesis that type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a factor in the onset and progression of osteoarthritis, and to characterise the quality of the articular cartilage in an appropriate rat model. Methods. T2DM rats were obtained from the UC Davis group and compared with control Lewis rats. The diabetic rats were sacrificed at ages from six to 12 months, while control rats were sacrificed at six months only. Osteoarthritis severity was determined via histology in four knee quadrants using the OARSI scoring guide. Immunohistochemical staining was also performed as a secondary form of osteoarthritic analysis. Results. T2DM rats had higher mean osteoarthritis scores than the control rats in each of the four areas that were analysed. However, only the results at the medial and lateral femur and medial tibia were significant. Cysts were also found in T2DM rats at the junction of the articular cartilage and subchondral bone. Immunohistochemical analysis does not show an increase in collagen II between control and T2DM rats. Mass comparisons also showed a significant relationship between mass and osteoarthritis score. Conclusions. T2DM was found to cause global degeneration in the UCD rat knee joints, suggesting that diabetes itself is a factor in the onset and progression of osteoarthritis. The immunohistochemistry stains showed little to no change in collagen II degeneration between T2DM and control rats. Overall, it seems that the animal model used is pertinent to future studies of T2DM in the development and progression of osteoarthritis. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:203–11