The Cementless Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (OUKR) was developed to address problems related to cementation, and has been demonstrated in a randomised study to have similar clinical outcomes with fewer radiolucencies than observed with the cemented device. However, before its widespread use it is necessary to clarify contraindications and assess the complications. This requires a larger study than any previously published.

We present a prospective multicentre series of 1000 cementless OUKRs in 881 patients at a minimum follow-up of one year. All patients had radiological assessment aligned to the bone–implant interfaces and clinical scores. Analysis was performed at a mean of 38.2 months (19 to 88) following surgery. A total of 17 patients died (comprising 19 knees (1.9%)), none as a result of surgery; there were no tibial or femoral loosenings. A total of 19 knees (1.9%) had significant implant-related complications or required revision. Implant survival at six years was 97.2%, and there was a partial radiolucency at the bone–implant interface in 72 knees (8.9%), with no complete radiolucencies. There was no significant increase in complication rate compared with cemented fixation (p = 0.87), and no specific contraindications to cementless fixation were identified.

Cementless OUKR appears to be safe and reproducible in patients with end-stage anteromedial osteoarthritis of the knee, with radiological evidence of improved fixation compared with previous reports using cemented fixation.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:181–7.

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 (sd 6.3; 17 to 48). Two patients required conversion to TKR: one for progression of lateral compartment osteoarthritis and one for infection. Implant survival at five years was 93% (95% CI 83 to 100). All but one patient reported being satisfied with the procedure. The outcome was not significantly influenced by age, gender, femoral or tibial tunnel placement, or whether the procedure was undertaken at one- or two-stages.

In summary, ACL reconstruction and Oxford UKR gives good results in patients with end-stage MCOA secondary to ACL deficiency.

This single-blinded randomised controlled trial investigated whether one design of mobile-bearing (MB) total knee replacement (TKR) has any advantage over a fixed-bearing (FB) design on long-term fixation as measured by radiostereometry. The amount of wear underneath the mobile bearing was also evaluated. A series of 42 knees was randomised to MB or FB tibial components with appropriate polyethylene inserts and followed for between ten and 12 years, or until the death of the patient. The polyethylene in the MB group was superior in that it was gamma-irradiated in inert gas and was calcium-stearate free; the polyethylene in the FB group was gamma-irradiated in air and contained calcium stearate. In theory this should be advantageous to the wear rate of the MB group. At final follow-up the overall mean migration was 0.75 mm (sd 0.76) in the MB group and 0.66 mm (sd 0.4) in the FB group, with the FB group demonstrating more posterior tilt and the MB group more internal rotation. In the FB group there was one revision for aseptic loosening, but none in the MB group. There were no significant differences in clinical or radiological scores.

For the MB group, the mean linear wear rate on the under-surface was 0.026 mm/year (sd 0.014). This was significantly smaller than the wear rate of 0.11 mm/year (sd 0.06) in the MB between femur and polyethylene (p < 0.001). Nevertheless, even in a best-case setting the mobile bearings of this TKR design had no apparent advantage in terms of fixation over the FB knee prosthesis at ten to 12 years. The wear underneath the mobile bearing was small and is unlikely to be clinically relevant.

The Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement gives good results in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the medial compartment. Previous studies have suggested that the presence of radiolucent lines (RLLs) does not reflect a poor outcome in such patients. However, the reliability and validity of this assessment have not been determined. Our aim was to assess the intra- and interobserver reliability and the sensitivity and specificity of the assessment of RLLs around both tibial and femoral components using standard radiographs.

Two reviewers assessed the radiographs of 45 patients who had loosening of the tibial or femoral component confirmed at revision surgery and compared them with those of a series of 45 asymptomatic patients matched for age and gender.

The results suggested that, using standard radiographs, tibial RLLs were 63.6% sensitive and 94.4% specific and femoral RLLs 63.9% sensitive and 72.7% specific for loosening. Overall intra- and interobserver reliability was highly variable, but zonal analysis showed that lucency at the tip of the femoral peg was significantly associated with loosening of the femoral component.

Fluoroscopically guided radiographs may improve the zonal reliability of the assessment of RLLs, but further independent and comparative studies are required. In the meantime, the innocence of the physiological RLLs detected by standard radiographs should be viewed with caution.

We reviewed the rate of revision of unicompartmental knee replacements (UKR) from the New Zealand Joint Registry between 1999 and 2008. There were 4284 UKRs, of which 236 required revision, 205 to a total knee replacement (U2T) and 31 to a further unicompartmental knee replacement (U2U). We used these data to establish whether the survival and functional outcome for revised UKRs were comparable with those of primary total knee replacement (TKR). The rate of revision for the U2T cohort was four times higher than that for a primary TKR (1.97 vs 0.48; p < 0.05). The mean Oxford Knee Score was also significantly worse in the U2T group than that of the primary TKR group (30.02 vs 37.16; p < 0.01). The rate of revision for conversion of a failed UKR to a further UKR (U2U cohort) was 13 times higher than that for a primary TKR.

The poor outcome of a UKR converted to a primary TKR compared with a primary TKR should contra-indicate the use of a UKR as a more conservative procedure in the younger patient.

We analysed data from the Oxford hip and knee questionnaires collected by the New Zealand Joint Registry at six months and five years after joint replacement, to determine if there was any relationship between the scores and the risk of early revision. Logistic regression of the six-month scores indicated that for every one-unit decrease in the Oxford score, the risk of revision within two years increased by 9.7% for total hip replacement (THR), 9.9% for total knee replacement (TKR) and 12.0% for unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). Our findings showed that 70% of the revisions within two years for TKR and 67% for THR and UKR would have been captured by monitoring the lowest 22%, 28% and 28%, respectively, of the Oxford scores. When analysed using the Kalairajah classification a score of < 27 (poor) was associated with a risk of revision within two years of 7.6% for THR, 7.0% for TKR and 24.3% for UKR, compared with risks of 0.7%, 0.7% and 1.8%, respectively, for scores > 34 (good or excellent).

Our study confirms that the Oxford hip and knee scores at six months are useful predictors of early revision after THR and TKR and we recommend their use for the monitoring of the outcome and potential failure in these patients.

The rotational alignment of the tibia is an unresolved issue in knee replacement. A poor functional outcome may be due to malrotation of the tibial component. Our aim was to find a reliable method for positioning the tibial component in knee replacement.

CT scans of 19 knees were reconstructed in three dimensions and orientated vertically. An axial plane was identified 20 mm below the tibial spines. The centre of each tibial condyle was calculated from ten points taken round the condylar cortex. The tibial tubercle centre was also generated as the centre of the circle which best fitted eight points on the outside of the tubercle in an axial plane at the level of its most prominent point.

The derived points were identified by three observers with errors of 0.6 mm to 1 mm. The medial and lateral tibial centres were constant features (radius 24 mm (sd 3), and 22 mm (sd 3), respectively). An anatomical axis was created perpendicular to the line joining these two points. The tubercle centre was found to be 20 mm (sd 7) lateral to the centre of the medial tibial condyle. Compared with this axis, an axis perpendicular to the posterior condylar axis was internally rotated by 6° (sd 3). An axis based on the tibial tubercle and the tibial spines was also internally rotated by 5° (sd 10).

Alignment of the knee when based on this anatomical axis was more reliable than either the posterior surfaces or any axis involving the tubercle which was the least reliable landmark in the region.

We compared the results of 146 patients who received an anatomic modular knee fixed-bearing total knee replacement (TKR) in one knee and a low contact stress rotating platform mobile-bearing TKR in the other. There were 138 women and eight men with a mean age of 69.8 years (42 to 80). The mean follow-up was 13.2 years (11.0 to 14.5). The patients were assessed clinically and radiologically using the rating systems of the Hospital for Special Surgery and the Knee Society at three months, six months, one year, and annually thereafter.

The assessment scores of both rating systems pre-operatively and at the final review did not show any statistically significant differences between the two designs of implant. In the anatomic modular knee group, one knee was revised because of aseptic loosening of the tibial component and one because of infection. In addition, three knees were revised because of wear of the polyethylene tibial bearing. In the low contact stress group, two knees were revised because of instability requiring exchange of the polyethylene insert and one because of infection.

The radiological analysis found no statistical difference in the incidence of radiolucent lines at the final review (Student’s t-test, p = 0.08), most of which occurred at tibial zone 1. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship for aseptic loosening of the anatomic modular knee and the low contact stress implants at 14.5 years was 99% and 100%, respectively, with a 95% confidence interval of 94% to 100% for both designs.

We found no evidence of the superiority of one design over the other at long-term follow-up.