Aims

Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is undertaken in patients with a passively correctable varus deformity. Our hypothesis was that restoration of natural soft tissue tension would result in a comparable lower limb alignment with the contralateral normal lower limb after mobile-bearing medial UKA.

Introduction. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) currently experiences increased popularity. It is usually assumed that UKA shows kinematic features closer to the natural knee than total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Especially in younger patients more natural knee function and faster recovery have helped to increase the popularity of UKA. Another leading reason for the popularity of UKA is the ability to preserve the remaining healthy tissues in the knee, which is not always possible in TKA. Many biomechanical questions remain, however, with respect to this type of replacement. 25% of knees with medial compartment osteoarthritis also have a deficient anterior cruciate ligament [1]. In current clinical practice, medial UKA would be contraindicated in these patients. Our hypothesis is that kinematics after UKA in combination with ACL reconstruction should allow to restore joint function close to the native knee joint. This is clinically relevant, because functional benefits for medial UKA should especially be attractive to the young and active patient. Materials and Methods. Six fresh frozen full leg cadaver specimens were prepared to be mounted in a kinematic rig (Figure 1) with six degrees of freedom for the knee joint. Three motion patterns were applied: passive flexion-extension, open chain extension, and squatting. These motion patterns were performed in four situations for each specimen: with the native knee; after implantation of a medial UKA (Figure 2); next after cutting the ACL and finally after reconstruction of the ACL. During the loaded motions, quadriceps and hamstrings muscle forces were applied. Infrared cameras continuously recorded the trajectories of marker frames rigidly attached to femur, tibia and patella. Prior computer tomography allowed identification of coordinate frames of the bones and calculations of anatomical rotations and translations. Strains in the collateral ligaments were calculated from insertion site distances. Results. Knee kinematics and collateral ligament strains were quite close to the native situation after both UKA and ACL reconstruction for all motor tasks. Nevertheless, some statistically significant differences were detected, which may be relevant clinically and biomechanically. In general, insertion of a UKA led to a knee joint which was somewhat less adducted (Figure 3), with a medial femoral condyle located slightly higher, confirming previously published findings [2]. These effects were slightly reduced both after cutting as well as after reconstructing the ACL. The joint became somewhat less stable in the AP direction after insertion of a UKA and this instability persisted not only after cutting but even after reconstructing the ACL

Introduction. A key outcome measured by national joint registries are revision events. This informs best practice and identifies poor-performing surgical devices. Although registry data often record reasons for revision arthroplasty, interpretation is limited by lack of standardised definitions of revision reasons and objective assessment of radiologic and laboratory parameters. Our study aim was to compare reasons for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) revision reported to the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR) with reasons identified by independent clinical review. Methods. A total of 2,272 patients undergoing primary medial and lateral UKA at four large tertiary hospitals between 2000 and 2017 were included. A total of 158 patients underwent subsequent revision with mean follow-up of 8 years. A systematic review of clinical findings, radiographs and operative data was performed to identify revision cases and to determine the reasons for revision using a standardised protocol. These were compared to reasons reported to the NZJR using Chi-squared and Fisher exact tests. Results. Osteoarthritis progression was the most common reason for revision on systematic clinical review (30%), however this was underreported to the registry (4%, p<0.001). A larger proportion of revisions reported to the registry were for ‘unexplained pain’ (30% of cases vs. 4% on clinical review, p<0.001). A reason for revision was not reported to the registry for 24 (15%) of cases. Discussion and Conclusion. We found significant inaccuracies in registry-reported reasons for revision following UKA. These included over-reporting of ‘unexplained pain’, under-reporting of osteoarthritis progression, and failure to identify a reason for revision. Efforts to improve registry capture of revision reasons for UKA should focus on increasing accuracy in these three areas. This could be addressed through standardised recording methods and tailored revision reason options for UKA for surgeons to select when recording the reasons

Introduction. This study assessed outcomes of total knee joint replacements (TKJR) in patients who had undergone previous periarticular osteotomy compared with unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). Establishing a difference in the results of total knee joint replacements following these operations may be an important consideration in the decision-making and patient counselling around osteotomy versus UKR for the management of single-compartment osteoarthritis. Method. Using data from the New Zealand Joint Registry, we identified 1,895 total knee joint replacements with prior osteotomy and 1,391 with prior UKR. Revision rates and patient-reported outcomes, as measured by the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), between these two groups were compared. Adjusted hazard ratios were also calculated to compare the groups. Results. The revision rate for total knee joint replacement following osteotomy was significantly lower than TKJR following UKR (0.88 per 100 component years versus 1.38 per 100 component years, respectively). Adjusted hazard ratio calculations found that those with TKJR with prior UKR had more than double the risk of requiring revision than those with prior osteotomy. Additionally, there was a statistically significant difference in the mean adjusted OKS scores between the two groups, with improved outcomes in the group with prior osteotomy. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that total knee joint replacement following periarticular osteotomy have a lower risk of revision and improved OKS when compared to those with prior UKR. Previous studies assessing New Zealand Joint Registry have not found a statistically significant difference between the two groups however, these results are no longer in keeping with more contemporary literature. Our study confirms the New Zealand population to be comparable with international studies with TKJR after osteotomy performing significantly better compared with prior UKR

Purpose. We may consider total knee arthroplasty on one knee and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty on another knee when the patient has different grade osteoarthritis on one knee and opposite knee. Both total knee and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty had been reported as excellent clinical results, but there can be different results and different preference if the same patient undergo operation of simulataneous total knee and unicompartmental knee. We performed total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and pretend to report results of the clinical and radiological results and rationale of the operation. Materials and Methods. From Marth 2007 to February 2014, 23 patients, 46 knees that underwent total knee arthroplasty and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty on knees with different osteoarthritis grade in same person enrolled in this study(Fig. 1). The mean age was 64.4 years old(range:55–75) and mean follow-up period was 25.1 months(range:13–72). Results. The tibiofemoral angle changed from 4.0 of varus to 5.4 of valgus in the total knee arthroplasty, and from 0.5 of valgus to 3.8 of valgus in the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. The mechanical axis deviation changed from varus 28.35mm to varus 3.68mm in the total knee arthroplasty, and from 16.42 to 8.81 in the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. The average Hospital for Special Surgery Knee-Rating Scale(HSS) improved from 55.1 preoperatively to 93.4 at last follow-up in the total knee arthroplasty, and from 65.2 to 95.2 in the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. The average WOMAC Score improved from 61.6 preoperatively to 18.0 at last follow-up in the total knee arthroplasty, and from 55.4 to 16.2 in the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. For patient preference, 5 patients(22%) preferred the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, and 6 patients(26%) preferred the total knee arthroplasty, and 12 patients felt no difference between two knees. 20 patients(87%) reported being ‘very satisfied’ or ‘satisfied’ in the total knee arthroplasty, and 18 patients(79%) reported in the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. We underwent 1 case complication of tibial implant loosening and varus malalignment. So, we converted total knee arthroplasty about 3 months later(Fig. 2). Conclusions. Total knee arthroplasty and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in same person showed satisfactory clinical and radiological results. There was no difference in preference site and postoperative range of motion showed more regainment on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. More complications were demonstrated in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in same person seems to be a good option when the both knee have different osteoarthritis grade

Source of the study: University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand and University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are predictors of knee arthroplasty revision. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is effective for patients with the correct indications, however has higher revision rates than total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Different revision thresholds for the procedures have been postulated. Our aims were to investigate: 1) if PROMs could predict knee arthroplasty revision within two years of the score at six months, five years and ten years follow-up, and 2) if revision ‘thresholds’ differed between TKA and UKA. All TKAs and UKAs captured by the New Zealand Joint Registry between 1999 and 2019 with at least one OKS response at six months (TKA n=27,708, UKA n=8,415), five years (TKA n=11,519, UKA n=3,365) or ten years (TKA n=6,311, UKA n=1,744) were included. were propensity-score matched 2:1 with UKAs for comparison of revision thresholds. Logistic regression indicated that for every one-unit decrease in OKS, the odds of TKA and UKA revision decreased by 10% and 11% at six months, 10% and 12% at five years and 9% and 5% at ten years. Fewer TKA patients with ‘poor’ outcomes (≤25) subsequently underwent revision compared with UKA at six months (5.1% vs. 19.6%, p<0.001), five years (4.3% vs. 12.5%, p<0.001) and ten years (6.4%vs. 15.0%, p=0.02). Compared with TKA, UKA patients were 2.5 times more likely to undergo revision for ‘unknown’ reasons, bearing dislocations and disease progression. The OKS is a strong predictor of subsequent knee arthroplasty revision within two years of the score from early to late term. A lower revision threshold was found with UKA when compared with a matched TKA cohort. Higher revision rates of UKA are associated with both lower clinical thresholds for revision and additional modes of UKA failure

Source of the study: University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has benefits for patients with appropriate indications. However, UKA has a higher risk of revision, particularly for low-usage surgeons. The introduction of robotic-arm assisted systems may allow for improved outcomes but is also associated with a learning curve. We aimed to characterise the learning curve of a robotic-arm assisted system (MAKO) for UKA in terms of operative time, limb alignment, component sizing, and patient outcomes. Operative times, pre- and post-surgical limb alignments, and component sizing were prospectively recorded for consecutive cases of primary medial UKA between 2017 and 2021 (n=152, 5 surgeons). Patient outcomes were captured with the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12) and re-operation events up to two years post-UKA. A Cumulative Summation (CUSUM) method was used to estimate learning curves and to distinguish between learning and proficiency phases. Introduction of the system had a learning curve of 11 cases. There was increased operative time of 13 minutes between learning and proficiency phases (learning 98 mins vs. proficiency 85 mins; p<0.001), associated with navigation registration and bone preparation/cutting. A learning curve was also found with polyethylene insert sizing (p=0.03). No difference in patient outcomes between the two phases were detected for patient-reported outcome measures, implant survival (both phases 98%; NS) or re-operation (learning 100% vs. proficiency: 96%; NS). Implant survival and re-operation rates did not differ between low and high usage surgeons (cut-off of 12 UKAs per year). Introduction of the robotic-arm assisted system for UKA led to increased operative times for navigation registration and bone preparation, but no differences were detected in terms of component placement or patient outcomes regardless of usage. The short learning curve regardless of UKA usage indicated that robotic-arm assisted UKA may be particularly useful for low-usage surgeons

Multiple reports suggest good outcome results following unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). However, several authors report technically difficult revision surgery secondary to osseous defects. We reviewed clinical outcomes following revision total knee replacement for failed UKR and analysed the reasons for failure and the technical aspects of the revision surgery. Between 2003 and 2009, thirty three revisions from unicompartmental knee replacement to total knee replacement were performed in thirty two patients at a single centre. Demographics, indications for the primary and revision procedures, details of the revised prosthesis including augments and any technical difficulties or complications were noted. Patient assessment included range of motion and the functional status of the affected knee in the form of the Oxford knee score questionnaire. Statistical analysis was performed with the Student t test. All 33 revision knees were available for prospective clinical and radiological follow-up. The minimum duration of follow-up after revision surgery was 1 year (mean 3 years, range 1 – 7 years). The median interval between the original unicompartmental knee replacements to revision surgery was 19 months (range 2 – 159 months). The predominant cause of failure was aseptic loosening (50%). Other reasons included persistent pain (21%), dislocated meniscus (18%), mal-alignment (7%) and progression of symptomatic osteoarthritis in another compartment (4%). 18 of the 33 revision procedures required additional augments. During the revision surgery, 11 knees required a long tibial stem while 1 required a long femoral stem. 10 knees required medial tibial wedge augmentation; bone graft was used in 6 knees while a metal wedge augment was used in 4 to fill significant osseous defects. At the time of follow-up, range of movement averaged 103 degrees (range 70 – 120). The mean one year Oxford knee score, was 29 compared to 39 for primary total knee replacements performed during the same period in a comparable sample group of patients at our institute (p < 0.001). Three patients continued to have pain and two required re-revision; one for infection and one for loosening. Aseptic loosening was the commonest mode of failure. Of the UKRs revised to TKRs, 90% were revised within 5 years. The majority of revisions required additional constructs. Oxford Knee Scores after revision surgery were inferior to those for primary TKR. The role of UKR needs to be more clearly defined

The treatment of medial knee osteoarthritis (OA) in conjunction with anterior knee laxity is an issue of debate. Current treatment options include knee joint distraction, unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) or high tibial osteotomy with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction or total knee replacement. Bone-conserving options are preferred for younger and active patients with intact lateral and patello-femoral compartment. However, still limited experience exists in the field of combining medial UKR and ACL reconstruction. The aim of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the results of combined fixed-bearing UKR and ACL reconstruction, specifically with regard to patient satisfaction, activity level, and postoperative functional outcomes. The hypothesis was that this represents a safe and viable procedure leading to improved stability and functional outcome in patients affected by isolated unicompartmental OA and concomitant ACL deficiency. Fourteen patients with ACL deficiency and concomitant medial compartment symptomatic osteoarthritis were treated from 2006 to 2010. Twelve of them were followed up for an average time of 7.8 year (range 6–10 years). Assessment included Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Oxford Knee score (OKS), American Knee Society scores (AKSS), WOMAC index of osteoarthritis, Tegner activity level, objective examination including instrumented laxity test with KT-1000 arthrometer and standard X-rays. Wilcoxon test was utilized to compare the pre-operative and follow-up status. Differences with a p value <0.05 were considered statistically significant. KOOS score, OKS, WOMAC index and the AKSS improved significantly at follow-up (p < 0.05). There was no clinical evidence of instability in any of the knees as evaluated with clinical an instrumented laxity testing (p < 0.05). No pathologic radiolucent lines were observed around the components. In one patient a total knee prosthesis was implanted due to the progression of signs of osteoarthritis in the lateral compartment 3 years after primary surgery. UKR combined with ACL reconstruction is a valid therapeutic option for young and active patients with a primary ACL injury who develop secondary OA and confirms subjective and objective clinical improvement up to 8 years after surgery

Introduction:. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a well established method for treatment of single compartment arthritis. However, a subset of patients still present with continued pain after their procedure in the setting of a normal radiographic examination. We propose the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a useful modality in determining the etiology of symptoms in symptomatic unicompartmental knee arthroplasties. Materials & Methods:. An IRB-approved retrospective analysis of 300 consecutive unicompartmental knee arthroplasties between 2008–2010 found 28 cases symptomatic for continued pain. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed with a 1.5 T Surface Coil unit after clinical and radiographic assessment. MRI evaluation included assessment for osteoarthritis, synovitis, osteolysis, and loosening. Validated questionnaires including PAQ, WOMAC and UCLA Activity Score were used for clinical assessment. Results:. The average age at surgery was 56.1 ± 10.9 years (34–79). Imaging results indicated progressive arthritis in 28 patients (100%), synovitis in 17 patients (61%), osteolysis in 9 patients (32.0%), and loosening in 3 patients (11%). Based on these results and other clinical findings, a revision or conversion to a TKR was advised for 10 patients and 18 were recommended for nonoperative therapies. One patient received treatment at a separate hospital, and another was lost to follow-up. At post-operative follow-up of 1.4 ± 0.9 years, 7 of the 10 patients (70%) in the operative group experienced improvement in pain and function. The mean PAQ, UCLA and WOMAC index scores for these patients were 8.0 ± 1.4 (7–9), 5.5 ± 6.4 (1–10), and 2.0 ± 2.8 (0–4), respectively. In the nonoperative group, 11 of the 18 patients (61%) experienced improvement in pain and function. Among these patients, the mean PAQ, UCLA and WOMAC index scores were 7.6 ± 3.7 (0–10), 5.9 ± 3.2 (1–10) and 8.9 ± 12.0 (0–28), respectively. Conclusion:. The use of MRI as an imaging modality for symptomatic arthroplasty patients is becoming more commonly used. This study shows how MRI with sound clinical judgment can influence treatment decisions and supports the use of high quality MRI as a diagnostic tool for the symptomatic unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Introduction. The efficacy of Virtual Reality (VR) as a teaching augment for arthroplasty has not been well examined for unfamiliar multistep procedures such as unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). This study sought to determine if VR improves surgical competence over traditional procedural preparation when performing a UKA. Methods. 22 Orthopaedic trainees were randomized to training sessions: 1) “VR group” with access to an immersive VR learning module that had been designed in conjunction with the manufacturer or 2) “Guide group” with access to manufacture's technique guide and surgical video. Both groups then performed a full UKA on SawBones models. Surgical competence was assessed via Objective Structures Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) validated rating system (max 25 points). Results. Participants equally distributed all training levels between groups. There was no difference in surgical times between VR and Guide groups (VR=43.0 vs Guide=42.4 mins; p=0.9). There was no difference in total OSATS score between groups (VR=14.2 vs Guide=15.7; p=0.59). There was also no difference between groups when sub-analysis was performed by training level. Most felt VR would be a useful tool for resident education (77%) and reported a likeliness to utilize VR for case preparation if available (86.4%). Conclusion. In a randomized controlled trial for trainees performing a complex, unfamiliar procedure (UKA), VR training demonstrated equivalent surgical competence to traditional technique guides and videos. Despite this, the majority of trainees find the technology beneficial and would use it if available. This project suggests as currently constructed, VR should be incorporated as an adjunct, rather than a replacement, to traditional surgical preparation/training methods

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) was first described over 30 years ago and allows replacement of a single compartment in patients who have isolated osteoarthritis. However, UKA is more technically challenging than total knee arthroplasty due to limited exposure as a minimally invasive procedure. In addition to component alignment and fixation, ligament balancing plays an important role in implant survival. Some failures of early UKA systems were attributed to a failure to adequately balance the knee. The development of robots to aid in performing the procedure has lead to renewed interest in this surgical technique. The use of a robot-assisted system allows the orthopaedic surgeon to verify that balancing sought pre-operatively correlates with that obtained at surgery. Some studies have shown good post-operative mechanical alignment utilizing this method. The aim of this study was to examine the variation in pre-operative templated ligament balance and that obtained during the operation. Data were prospectively collected on 51 patients (52 knees) undergoing robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty by a single surgeon. For pre-operative planning, dynamic ligament balancing was obtained of the operative knee under valgus stress, prior to any bony cuts. Final intra-operative images with the prosthesis in place were taken without valgus stress. Positive values denoted loose ligamentous balancing while negative values indicated ligament tightness. A small variation of less than 1 mm was measured between the pre-operative plan and the final image with the implant in place. At 0 degrees the mean change was −0.26 mm (range, −4.40 to 2.20 mm), at 30 degrees −0.53 mm (range, −5.30 to 1.80 mm), at 60 degrees −0.04 mm (range, −3.10 to 2.30 mm) and at 90 degrees 0.16 mm (range, −2.70 to 2.00 mm). These results show that planned dynamic ligament balancing is accurate to within 0.52 mm. The technological advancements with robotic feedback in orthopaedic surgery can aid in the success of unicompartmental knee replacement surgery. Ensuring that pre-operative templated changes match those performed during surgery is an important predictor of outcome. With proper planning prior to surgery, the use of a robot in UKA can improve ligament balancing. This can be done at various angles, ensuring excellent ligament balancing throughout the entire range of motion. Correct component alignment reduces the risk of prosthetic failure and may increase the length of implant survival. Further fine-tuning of the accuracy of feedback between the robot and the anatomical points will improve the accuracy of UKA

Introduction. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) was first described over 30 years ago and allows replacement of a single compartment in patients who have isolated osteoarthritis. 1. However, UKA is more technically challenging than total knee arthroplasty due to limited exposure as a minimally invasive procedure. In addition to component alignment and fixation, ligament balancing plays an important role in implant survival. 2. Some failures of early UKA systems were attributed to a failure to adequately balance the knee. The development of robots to aid in performing the procedure has lead to renewed interest in this surgical technique. The use of a robot-assisted system allows the orthopaedic surgeon to verify that balancing sought pre-operatively correlates with that obtained at surgery. Some studies have shown good post-operative mechanical alignment utilizing this method. 3. The aim of this study was to examine the variation in pre-operative templated ligament balance and that obtained during the operation. Methods. Data were prospectively collected on 52 patients (51 knees) undergoing robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty by a single surgeon. For pre-operative planning, dynamic ligament balancing was obtained of the operative knee under valgus stress, prior to any bony cuts. Final intra-operative images with the prosthesis in place were taken without valgus stress. Positive values denoted loose ligamentous balancing while negative values indicated ligament tightness. Results. A small variation of less than 1 mm was measured between the pre-operative plan and the final image with the implant in place. At 0 degrees the mean change was −0.26 mm (range, −4.40 to 2.20 mm), at 30 degrees −0.53 mm (range, −5.30 to 1.80 mm), at 60 degrees −0.04 mm (range, −3.10 to 2.30 mm) and at 90 degrees 0.16 mm (range, −2.70 to 2.00 mm). These results show that planned dynamic ligament balancing is accurate to within 0.52 mm. Conclusion. The technological advancements with robotic feedback in orthopaedic surgery can aid in the success of unicompartmental knee replacement surgery. Ensuring that pre-operative templated changes match those performed during surgery is an important predictor of outcome. With proper planning prior to surgery, the use of a robot in UKA can improve ligament balancing. This can be done at various angles, ensuring excellent ligament balancing throughout the entire range of motion. Correct component alignment reduces the risk of prosthetic failure and may increase the length of implant survival. Further fine-tuning of the accuracy of feedback between the robot and the anatomical points will improve the accuracy of UKA

Introduction:. Isolated lateral compartment osteoarthritis (OA) occurs in 5–10% of knees with unicompartmental OA. Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty has been limited in its prevalence due to challenging surgical technique issues. A robotic-arm assisted surgical technique has emerged as a way to achieve precise implant positioning which can potentially improve surgical outcomes. Methods:. 63 consecutive lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasties were performed by a single surgeon with the use of a metal backed, cemented prosthesis installed with the three-dimensional intra-operative kinematics and haptic robotic guidance. The average age of the patient was 72.7 years (range: 59–87) and the average BMI was 27.2 (range: 19.0–38.6). The follow-up ranged from 2 months to 30 months. Results:. All patients recovered flexion to an average of 130° at 6 weeks post-operatively, compared to an average of 127° pre-operatively. There was one revision to a total knee at 26 months post-operatively for progression of OA to the patellofemoral compartment. Conclusion:. Early results of robotically guided lateral UKA are encouraging and provide evidence to show that lateral UKA is a viable option for patients with lateral OA disease. Three dimensional planning, intra-operative kinematic analysis and haptic robotic guidance provide a significant advantage over manual installation for lateral compartment arthroplasty of the knee. The significant anterior to posterior translation of the lateral femoral condyle along with the “screw-home” mechanism associated with the lateral compartment makes the tracking of the lateral compartment highly complex when retaining the cruciate ligaments. Intraoperative planning and adjustment of the preoperative plan provided only with this robotic system results in optimized lateral compartment kinematics. Further mid to long term studies are needed to determine survivorship as it compares to medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is considered a highly successful procedure. However, complications and revisions may still occur, and some may be related to the operative technique. Computer assistance has been suggested to improve the accuracy of implantation of a UKA. The present study was designed to evaluate the long-term (more than 10 years) results of an UKA which was routinely implanted with help of a non-image based navigation system. MATERIAL AND METHODS. All patients operated on between 2004 and 2005 for implantation of a navigated UKA were included. Usual demographic and peri-operative items have been record. All patients were prospectively followed with clinical and radiological examination. All patients were contacted after the 10 year follow-up for repeat clinical and radiological examination (KSS, Oxford knee questionnaire and knee plain X-rays). Patients who did not return were interviewed by phone call. For patients lost of follow-up, family or general practitioner was contacted to obtain relevant information about prosthesis survival. Survival curve was plotted according to Kaplan-Meier. RESULTS. 57 UKAs were implanted during the study time-frame. Final follow-up (including death or revision) was obtained for 50 cases (88%). Clinical status after 10 years was obtained for 45 cases (80%). 4 prosthetic revisions were performed for mechanical reasons during the follow- up time (7%). The 10 year survival rate was 94%. No component was considered loose at the final radiographic evaluation. No polyethylene wear was detected at the final radiographic evaluation. DISCUSSION. This study confirms our initial hypothesis, namely quite satisfactory results of a navigated implanted UKA after more than 10 years. Navigation, whose precision is no longer to be demonstrated, probably contributed to the quality of the results. A more consistent anatomical reconstruction and ligamentous balance of the knee should lead to more consistent survival of the UKA. However, superiority of navigated UKA in comparison to conventional implanted UKA is difficult to prove because of the subtle differences expected in mostly underpowered studies. Longer term follow-up may be required

Introduction & aims. Patient specific instrumentation (PSI) is a useful tool to execute pre-operatively planned surgical cuts and reduce the number of trays in surgery. Debate currently exists around improved accuracy, efficacy and patient outcomes when using PSI cutting guides compared to conventional instruments. Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) revision to Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) represents a complex scenario in which traditional bone landmarks, and patient specific axes that are routinely utilised for component placement may no longer be easily identifiable with either conventional instruments or navigation. PSI guides are uniquely placed to solve this issue by allowing detailed analysis of the patient morphology outside the operating theatre. Here we present a tibia and femur PSI guide for TKA on patients with UKA. Method. Patients undergoing pre-operative planning received a full leg pass CT scan. Images are then segmented and landmarked to generate a patient specific model of the knee. The surgical cuts are planned according to surgeon preference. PSI guide models are planned to give the desired cut, then 3D printed and provided along with a bone model in surgery. PSI-bone and PSI-UKA contact areas are modified to fit the patient anatomy and allow safe placement and removal. The PSI-UKA contact area on the tibia is defined across the UKA tibial tray after the insert has been removed. Further contact is planned on the tibial eminence if it can be accurately segmented in the CT and the anterior superior tibia on the contralateral compartment, see example guide in Figure 1. Contact area on the femur is defined on the superior trochlear groove, native condyle, femur centre and femoral UKA component if it can be accurately segmented in the CT. Surgery was performed with a target of mechanical alignment using OMNI APEX PS implants (Raynham, MA). The guide was planned such that the OMNI cut block could be placed on the securing pins to translate the cut. Component alignment and resections values were calculated by registering the pre-operative bones and component geometries to post-operative CT images. Results. Four UKA to TKA surgeries have been performed using revision PSI guides. The maximum difference from planned to achieved component alignments are: Femoral valgus = 2.4â□°, Tibial varus = 2.5â□°, Femoral internal rotation = 3.6â□°, Femoral flexion = 5.1â□° and tibial slope = 2.9â□°, see boxplot of results in Figure 2. All median values are within 2.5â□° of the planned alignment. A further five cases are to be analysed. Conclusions. A PSI guide designed for UKR to TKR revision surgery has been successfully used in surgery with acceptable errors. A larger study must be performed to determine the reliability and reproducibility of the design and method over a wide range of patient anatomy and UKA imaging flare

Osteoarthritis of the knee is a debilitating condition affecting millions of persons, often requiring arthroplasty to relieve pain and improve mobility. For those patients with disease in only one compartment of the knee, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) can be a viable surgical alternative. To date, there has not been a large series reported in the literature of UKAs performed with robotic assistance. The aim of this study was to examine the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent this procedure. Five hundred and ten procedures in patients with a mean age of 63.7 years (range, 28 to 88 years) who underwent unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using a robotic-assisted system between July, 2008 and June, 2010 were identified. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Oxford Knee Score and patients without recent follow-up were contacted by telephone. The revision rate and time to revision were also examined. The average length of stay for patients who underwent robot-assisted UKA was 1.4 days (range, 1 to 7 days). There was minimal blood loss with most procedures. At latest clinical follow-up, most patients were doing well after UKA with a mean Oxford Knee Score of 36.1 + 9.92. The revision rate was 2.5% with 13 patients being either converted from an inlay to onlay prosthesis or conversion to total knee arthroplasty. The most common indication for revision was tibial component loosening, followed by progression of arthritis. Mean time to revision was 9.55 + 5.48 months (range, 1 to 19 months). Unicompartmental arthroplasty with a robotic system provides good pain relief and functional outcome at short-term follow-up. Ensuring correct component alignment and ligament balancing increases the probability of a favorable outcome following surgery. Proper patient selection for appropriate UKA candidates remains an important factor for successful outcomes

INTRODUCTION. Successful clinical outcomes following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) depend on component positioning, soft tissue balance and overall limb alignment which can be difficult to achieve using manual instrumentation. Recently, robotically guided technology has been used to improve post-operative implant positioning, and limb alignment in UKA with the expectation that this will result in greater implant longevity. This multi-center study examines the survivorship of this robotically guided procedure coupled with a novel, anatomically designed UKA implant at two years follow up. OBJECTIVES. This study examines the two year survivorship and patient satisfaction of an anatomically designed UKA implant using a new robotically guided technology that has been shown to improve implant positioning and alignment. METHODS. 788 patients (890 knees) from 6 surgeons underwent robotically guided unicompartmental arthroplasty surgery and reached a minimum two year follow-up. The tibial component was a fixed bearing, metal backed onlay design. Patients were consecutive for each respective surgeon and were also each surgeon's first series of patients for that implant system. As part of an IRB approved study, every patient was contacted and asked a series of five questions to determine implant survivorship and patient satisfaction at a two year follow up. 620 patients (701 knees) enrolled in the study; the overall enrollment rate was 79%. There were 352 males and 266 females; the average age was 70 ± 9.23 years (range: 39–93) and the average BMI was 29.35 ± 4.59 (range: 18.97–47.77). The average follow up at the time the patients were contacted was 30 ± 5.53 months (range: 22–42). RESULTS. Eight knees were reported as revised within 24 months after the index procedure, yielding a two year revision rate of 1.1%. The average time to revision was 11 months. Five patients returned to their same surgeon for the revision procedure. Seven knees were revised to a total knee arthroplasty; one knee was revised to another unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. 71% of patients reported feeling “Very Satisfied” with their overall knee function. 22% of patients reported feeling “Satisfied,” 3% of patients reported feeling “Neutral,” 3% of patients reported feeling “Dissatisfied,” and 1% of patients reported feeling “Very Dissatisfied”. CONCLUSIONS. Excellent survival and satisfaction outcomes were noted in this subset of patients at two years post-operative. This robotically guided procedure shows promise of improved survivorship rates for UKA compared to what is currently reported in implant registries and comparative studies. These promising results indicate that improved implant placement accuracy achieved with robotic assistance leads to improved implant survivorship and patient outcomes

We carried out a comparison of the analgesic requirements, length of stay in hospital, complications and cost effectiveness of patients who had either a continuous disposable infusion pump or standard treatment for unicompartmental knee replacement. This study began as an audit. We completed the audit loop with a prospective study after implementing our recommendations. The device is a single use disposable elastometric pump, set immediately after surgery to deliver a continuous flow of 0.5% bupivacaine at a rate of 2mls per hour for 48 hrs into the knee joint via a fine catheter with a fenestrated tip. The case notes of all patients in the study were analysed to establish their total analgesic requirements for 48hrs following surgery. Complications and length of stay in hospital were recorded This has changed our clinical practice. Results of our study of 50 patients, 25 in each group (age and sex matched) confirmed that there was a significant reduction in opiate requirements after introduction of the pain pump. Length of stay in hospital was reduced from 5.7 to 3.9 days. Patients' requirements for NSAIDs were reduced. There were no significant complications in the pain pump group. The costs of the pump (£40) were offset by the reduction in analgesic requirements and shortened length of stay in hospital. We conclude this form of analgesia is safe, effective and cost effective. Our department has now changed to using the pump for all unicompartmental knee replacements

Introduction. Unicompartmental Knee Replacement Arthroplasty (UKA) is a treatment option for early knee OA that appears under-utilised, partly because of a lack of clear guidance on how to best restore lasting knee function using such devices. Computational tools can help consider inherent uncertainty in patient anatomy, implant positioning and loading when predicting the performance of any implant. In the present research an approach for creating patient-specific finite element models (FEM) incorporating joint and muscle loads was developed to assess the response of the underlying bone to UKA implantation. Methods. As a basis for future uncertainty modelling of UKA performance, the geometriesof 173 lower limbs weregenerated from clinical CT scans. These were segmented (ScanIP, Simpleware Ltd, UK) to reconstruct the 3D surfaces of the femur, tibia, patella and fibula. The appropriate UKA prosthesis (DePuy, U.S.) size was automatically selected according to tibial plateau size and virtually positioned (Figure 1). Boolean operations and mesh generation were accomplished with ScanIP. A patient-specific musculoskeletal model was generated in open-source software OpenSim (Delp et al. 2007) based on the Gait2392 model. The model was scaled to a specific size and muscle insertion points were modified to corresponding points on lower limb of patient. Hip joint load, muscle forces and lower limb posture during gait cycle were calculated from the musculoskeletal model. The FE meshes of lower limb bones were transformed to the corresponding posture at each time point of a gait cycle and FE analyses were performed (Ansys, Inc. U.S) to evaluate the strain distribution on the tibial plateau in the implanted condition. Results. With the tibial component positioned above, along or below the joint line, the lower limb alignment was more varus, remained unaltered or more valgus respectively (Figure 2). With the tibial component positioned 3mm above the joint line, the peak strain in the underlying bone was 670 µstrain on medial (UKA) side and 6780 µstrain on the intact side. With the tibial component positioned 3mm below the joint line, the peak strain was 3010 µstrain on the medial side and 5330 µstrain on the intact side. Here, the strains on the medial side increased by 2640 µstrain whilst they were reduced by 1450 µstrain on the intact side compared to the unimplanted case. Conclusion. The present research has delivered a framework which can be exploited in future uncertainty modelling of UKA performance predictions. The patient-specific model incorporates loading, anatomical and material property variability, and can be applied to evaluate the performance of UKA prostheses for metrics such as stress/strain/micromotions in larger patient populations. For figures/tables, please contact authors directly.