One of the main causes of tibial revision surgery for total knee arthroplasty is aseptic loosening. Therefore, stable fixation between the tibial component and the cement, and between the tibial component and the bone, is essential. A factor that could influence the implant stability is the implant design, with its different variations. In an existing implant system, the tibial component was modified by adding cement pockets. The aim of this experimental in vitro study was to investigate whether additional cement pockets on the underside of the tibial component could improve implant stability. The relative motion between implant and bone, the maximum pull-out force, the tibial cement mantle, and a possible path from the bone marrow to the metal-cement interface were determined. A tibial component with (group S: Attune S+) and without (group A: Attune) additional cement pockets was implanted in 15 fresh-frozen human leg pairs. The relative motion was determined under dynamic loading (extension-flexion 20° to 50°, load-level 1,200 to 2,100 N) with subsequent determination of the maximum pull-out force. In addition, the cement mantle was analyzed radiologically for possible defects, the tibia base cement adhesion, and preoperative bone mineral density (BMD).Aims
Methods
The Oxford mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee
replacement (UKR) is an effective and safe treatment for osteoarthritis
of the medial compartment. The results in the lateral compartment
have been disappointing due to a high early rate of dislocation
of the bearing. A series using a newly designed domed tibial component
is reported. The first 50 consecutive domed lateral Oxford UKRs in 50 patients
with a mean follow-up of three years (2.0 to 4.3) were included.
Clinical scores were obtained prospectively and Kaplan-Meier survival
analysis was performed for different endpoints. Radiological variables
related to the position and alignment of the components were measured. One patient died and none was lost to follow-up. The cumulative
incidence of dislocation was 6.2% (95% confidence interval (CI)
2.0 to 17.9) at three years. Survival using revision for any reason
and aseptic revision was 94% (95% CI 82 to 98) and 96% (95% CI 85
to 99) at three years, respectively. Outcome scores, visual analogue
scale for pain and maximum knee flexion showed a significant improvement
(p <
0.001). The mean Oxford knee score was 43 ( Clinical results are excellent and short-term survival has improved
when compared with earlier series. The risk of dislocation remains
higher using a mobile-bearing UKR in the lateral compartment when
compared with the medial compartment. Patients should be informed
about this complication. To avoid dislocations, care must be taken
not to elevate the lateral joint line.