Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has numerous advantages over total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and one disadvantage, the higher revision rate. The best way to minimize the revision rate is for surgeons to use UKA for at least 20% of their knee arthroplasties. To achieve this, they need to learn and apply the appropriate indications and techniques. This would decrease the revision rate and increase the number of UKAs which were implanted, which would save money and patients would benefit from improved outcomes over their lifetime.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:432–5.

There has been speculation as to how the outcome of revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) compares with that of primary TKA. We have collected data prospectively from patients operated on by one surgeon using one prosthesis in each group. One hundred patients underwent primary TKA and 60 revision TKA. They completed SF-12 and WOMAC questionnaires before and at six and 12 months after operation.

The improvements in the SF-12 physical scores and WOMAC pain, stiffness and function scores in both primary and revision TKA patients were highly statistically significant at six months. There was no statistically significant difference in the size of the improvement in the SF-12 physical and WOMAC pain, stiffness and function scores between the primary and revision patients at six months after surgery. The SF-12 mental scores of patients in both groups showed no statistically significant difference after surgery at the six- and 12-month assessments.

Our findings show that primary and revision TKA lead to a comparable improvement in patient-perceived outcomes of physical variables in both generic and disease-specific health measures at follow-up at one year.