Mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacements
(UKRs) with a flat tibial plateau have not performed well in the
lateral compartment, owing to a high dislocation rate. This led
to the development of the Domed Lateral Oxford UKR (Domed OUKR)
with a biconcave bearing. The aim of this study was to assess the
survival and clinical outcomes of the Domed OUKR in a large patient
cohort in the medium term. We prospectively evaluated 265 consecutive knees with isolated
disease of the lateral compartment and a mean age at surgery of
64 years (32 to 90). At a mean follow-up of four years ( The Domed Lateral OUKR gives good clinical outcomes, low re-operation
and revision rates and a low dislocation rate in patients with isolated
lateral compartmental disease, in the hands of the designer surgeons. Cite this article:
The Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement
(UKR) is an established treatment option in the management of symptomatic
end-stage medial compartmental osteoarthritis (MCOA), which works
well in the young and active patient. However, previous studies
have shown that it is reliable only in the presence of a functionally
intact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). This review reports the
outcomes, at a mean of five years and a maximum of ten years, of 52
consecutive patients with a mean age of 51 years (36 to 57) who
underwent staged or simultaneous ACL reconstruction and Oxford UKR.
At the last follow-up (with one patient lost to follow-up), the
mean Oxford knee score was 41 ( In summary, ACL reconstruction and Oxford UKR gives good results
in patients with end-stage MCOA secondary to ACL deficiency.
To evaluate the role of “top up” intra-articular local anaesthetic injection in patients who have had UKR. 43 patients scheduled to have a cemented Oxford UKR were prospectively recruited and randomised. All patients had the same initial anaesthetic regime of general anaesthesia, femoral nerve block and intra-operative intra-articular infiltration. All patients had a multi-holed epidural catheter placed intra-articularly prior to wound closure. Patients had the same operative technique, post operative rehabilitation and rescue analgesia. An independent, blinded observer recorded post-operative pain scores using a visual analogue score every 6 hours and any rescue analgesia. On the morning after surgery, 22 patients, (Group I), received 20 mls of 0.5% bupivicaine through the catheter whilst 21, (Group II), patients had 20 mls of normal saline by the same observer, after which the catheter was removed. No statistical difference was found in pain scores on the day of operation between the groups. However, patients in Group I had a significantly better pain score initially post top up and at 6 hours (2.4 (0-8) vs 5.7 (2-9), p<0.001). This cohort of patients required less rescue analgesia (p<0.001). In addition, Group I had statistically significant higher patient satisfaction outcome scores after the infiltration, (p<0.001).STUDY PURPOSES
METHOD AND RESULTS