A retrospective study was conducted to measure short-term Nonweightbearing supine RSA exams were performed postoperatively and at six, 12, and 24 months. Weightbearing standing RSA exams were performed on select patients at 12 and 24 months. Wear was measured both linearly (joint space) and volumetrically (digital model overlap) at each available follow-up. Precision of both methods was assessed by comparing double RSA exams. Patient age, sex, body mass index, and Oxford Knee Scores were analyzed for any association with PE wear.Aims
Patients and Methods
As part of the national initiative to reduce
waiting times for joint replacement surgery in Wales, the Cardiff
and Vale NHS Trust referred 224 patients to the NHS Treatment Centre
in Weston-Super-Mare for total knee replacement (TKR). A total of
258 Kinemax TKRs were performed between November 2004 and August
2006. Of these, a total of 199 patients (232 TKRs, 90%) have been
followed up for five years. This cohort was compared with 258 consecutive
TKRs in 250 patients, performed at Cardiff and Vale Orthopaedic
Centre (CAVOC) over a similar time period. The five year cumulative
survival rate was 80.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 74.0 to 86.0)
in the Weston-Super-Mare cohort and 95.0% (95% CI 90.2 to 98.2)
in the CAVOC cohort with revision for any reason as the endpoint.
The relative risk for revision at Weston-Super-Mare compared with
CAVOC was 3.88 (p <
0.001). For implants surviving five years,
the mean Oxford knee scores (OKS) and mean EuroQol (EQ-5D) scores
were similar (OKS: Weston-Super-Mare 29 (2 to 47) The results show a higher revision rate for patients operated
at Weston-Super-Mare Treatment Centre, with a reduction in functional
outcome and quality of life after revision. This further confirms
that patients moved from one area to another for joint replacement
surgery fare poorly.
The options for treatment of the young active patient with isolated symptomatic osteoarthritis of the medial compartment and pre-existing deficiency of the anterior cruciate ligament are limited. The potential longevity of the implant and levels of activity of the patient may preclude total knee replacement, and tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty are unreliable because of the ligamentous instability. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasties tend to fail because of wear or tibial loosening resulting from eccentric loading. Therefore, we combined reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee in 15 patients (ACLR group), and matched them with 15 patients who had undergone Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with an intact anterior cruciate ligament (ACLI group). The clinical and radiological data at a minimum of 2.5 years were compared for both groups. The groups were well matched for age, gender and length of follow-up and had no significant differences in their pre-operative scores. At the last follow-up, the mean outcome scores for both the ACLR and ACLI groups were high (Oxford knee scores of 46 (37 to 48) and 43 (38 to 46), respectively, objective Knee Society scores of 99 (95 to 100) and 94 (82 to 100), and functional Knee Society scores of 96 and 96 (both 85 to 100). One patient in the ACLR group needed revision to a total knee replacement because of infection. No patient in either group had radiological evidence of component loosening. The radiological study showed no difference in the pattern of tibial loading between the groups. The short-term clinical results of combined anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty are excellent. The previous shortcomings of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the presence of deficiency of the anterior cruciate ligament appear to have been addressed with the combined procedure. This operation seems to be a viable treatment option for young active patients with symptomatic arthritis of the medial compartment, in whom the anterior cruciate ligament has been ruptured.
