Unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis can be treated with either Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) or Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) and controversy remains as to which treatment is best. UKA has been reported to offer a variety of advantages, however many still see it as a temporary procedure with higher revision rates. We aimed to clarify the role of UKA and evaluate the long-term and revision outcomes. We retrospectively reviewed the pain, function and total Knee Society Score (KSS) for 602 UKA and 602 TKA in age and gender matched patients over ten years. The total pre-operative KSS scores were not significantly different between UKA and TKA (42.67 vs 40.54 P=0.021). KSS (pain) was significantly better in the TKA group (44.39 vs 41.38 P= 0.007) at one year and at five years post-operatively (45.33 vs 43.12 P=0.004). There was no statistically significant difference for KSS (total) in TKA and UKA during the study period. 16.3% of UKA and 20.1% of TKA had a documented complication. 79 UKA (13%) and 36 TKA (6%) required revision surgery. Despite the higher revision rate, pre-operative KSS (total) before revision was not significantly different between UKA and TKA (42.94 vs 42.43 P=0.84). Performance for UKAs was inferior to TKAs in Kaplan-Meier cumulative survival analysis at 10 years (P<0.001). Both UKA and TKA are viable treatment options for unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis, each with their own merits. UKA is associated with fewer complications whereas TKA provides better initial pain relief and is more durable and less likely to require revision.
Despite multiple published reviews, the optimum method of correction and stabilisation of Blount's disease remains controversial. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of acute correction of late-onset tibial vara by percutaneous proximal tibial osteotomy with circular external fixation using two simple rings. This technique was developed to minimise cost in a context of limited resources. This study was conducted between 2016 and 2020. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical notes and radiographs of 30 patients (32tibiae) who had correction of late-onset tibia by proximal tibial osteotomy and Ilizarov external fixator. All cases were followed up to 2 years. The mean proximal tibial angle was 65.7° (±7.8) preoperatively and 89.8° (±1.7) postoperatively. The mean mechanical axis deviation improved from 56.2 (±8.3) preoperatively to 2.8 (±1.6) mm postoperatively. The mean femoral-tibial shaft angle was changed from – 34.3° (±6.7) preoperatively to 5.7° (±2.8) after correction. Complications included overcorrection (9%) and pin tract infection (25%). At final follow up, all patients had full knee range of motion and normal function. All cases progressed to union and there were no cases of recurrence of deformity. This simple procedure provides secure fixation allowing early weight bearing and early return to function. It can be used in the context of health care systems with limited resources. It has a relatively low complication rate. Our results suggest that acute correction and simple circular frame fixation is an excellent treatment choice for cases of late-onset tibia vara, especially in severe deformities.
The surgical treatment of unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis remains controversial. This study aims to compare the medium-term outcomes of age and gender matched patients treated with unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) and total knee replacement (TKR). We retrospectively reviewed pain, function and total knee society scores (KSS) for every UKR and age and gender matched TKR in NHS Tayside, with up to 10 years prospective data from Tayside Arthroplasty Audit Group. KSS was compared at 1, 3 and 5 years. Medical complications and joint revision were identified. Kaplan-Meier with revision as end-point was used for implants survival analysis. 602 UKRs were implanted between 2001 and 2013. Preoperative KSS for pain and total scores were not significantly different between UKRs and TKRs whereas preoperative function score was significantly better for UKRs. Function scores remained significantly better in UKRs from preoperative until 3 years follow up. Further analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in the change of function scores in both groups over time. There was a trend for TKRs to perform better than UKRs in pain scores. Total KSS for both groups were not significantly different at any point of the 5-year study. Fewer medical complications were reported in the UKR group. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a survival rate of 93.7% in UKRs and of 97% in TKRs (Log rank p-value = 0.012). The revision rate for UKR was twice as much as TKR. The theoretical advantages of UKR are not borne out by the findings in this study other than immediate postoperative complications.
Pain produced by the tourniquet is a common source of complaint for patients undergoing carpal tunnel decompression. Practice varies as to tourniquet position. There is little evidence to suggest benefit of one position over another. Our aim was to compare the experience of both the patient and the surgeon with the tourniquet placed either on the arm or the forearm. Ethical approval was granted. Following power calculation and a significance level set at 0.05, 100 patients undergoing open carpal tunnel decompression under local anaesthetic were randomised to arm or forearm group. Visual Analogue Scores (VAS) (0–100) for pain, blood pressure and heart rate were taken at 2 minute intervals. The operating surgeon provided a VAS for bloodless field achieved and obstruction caused by the tourniquet. The demographics of the groups was similar. There were no statistically significant differences in any measure between the groups. Average tourniquet times were 8.8 minutes (forearm) and 8.2 minutes (arm). The average VAS score for forearm and arm was 13 and 11 respectively for bloodless field, 9 and 2 for obstruction. Average overall VAS for pain was 27 in each group, however interval VAS scores for pain were higher in the arm group. The average change Mean Arterial Pressure was −5 mmHg (forearm) −2 mmHg (arm) pulse rate was −1 bpm (forearm) and −2 bpm (arm). Tourniquet placement on the arm does not result in significant difference in patient pain, physiological response or length of operation. Surgeons reported less obstruction and better bloodless fields with an arm tourniquet, however there was a trend for forearm tourniquet to result in less pain for the patient.
Prophylactic pinning of the contralateral hip in the treatment of slipped upper femoral epiphysis has been shown to be safer than continued observation of the contralateral hip. This treatment remains controversial due to the potential for harm caused to an apparently unaffected hip. There is evidence that pinning of an already slipped epiphysis causes growth disturbance of the proximal femur, however Hagglund showed that there is not necessarily growth arrest at the physis after pinning, as the slip occurs at the hypertrophic layer of the growth plate with no damage to the germative layer. This was confirmed by Guzzanti who confirmed that a single screw provided epiphyseal stability and preserved potential for growth. We conducted a pilot study to determine whether prophylactic pinning affects subsequent growth of the unaffected hip. In order to determine the effect of prophylactic pinning we compared radiographs skeletally mature patients who had either undergone the procedure (group 1), not undergone the procedure but had pinning of the affected side (group 2), and adults with no history of SUFE (group 3). We measured the articulo-trochanteric distance and calculated the ratio of the trochanteric-trochanteric distance to articulo-trochanteric distance. These measures have been used in previous studies and shown to be reliable indicators of disturbed proximal femoral growth. As this was a pilot study we recruited 8 to each group. The absolute sum of the ATDs were 219mm (average 27.3mm) Group 1, 213mm (average 26.6mm) Group2 and 258mm (average 32.5mm). The average trochanter-trochanter: ATD ratio in group 1 was 2.7 (1.9 - 3.8) compared to 2.7 (2.3 - 3.2) and 2.3 (1.9 - 2.7) in groups 2 and 3 respectively. Our results suggest no difference in subsequent growth between hips that are prophylactically pinned and those that are not. They also show that unpinned hips go on to grow abnormally when compared to normal hips suggesting perhaps sub-clinical SUFE. These results have prompted expansion of the study to include much a higher number of patients.
