Suscribirse

Cemented all polyethylene tibial insert unicompartimental knee arthroplasty: A long term follow-up study - 05/03/09

Doi : 10.1016/j.otsr.2008.04.001 
S. Lustig, J.-L. Paillot, E. Servien, J. Henry, T. Ait Si Selmi, P. Neyret
Knee Surgery Department, centre Livet, Albert Trillat Center, North Hospitals Group, 8, rue de Margnolles, 69300 Caluire, France 

Corresponding author.

Bienvenido a EM-consulte, la referencia de los profesionales de la salud.
Artículo gratuito.

Conéctese para beneficiarse!

Summary

Unicompartimental knee arthroplasty outcome is sometimes compared to total knee arthroplasty but various implant parameters might greatly influence this outcome. The objectives of this study were to report the results of a consecutive series of 172 all-polyethylene unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKAs) and to detail possible factors of success and failure.

Hypothesis

It is possible to outline implant and technique factors determining success or failure in unicompartimental knee arthroplasty.

Materials and methods

One hundred seventy-two HLS-type cemented resurfacing UKAs, with the femoral implant made of chrome-cobalt and the tibial implant tibial entirely in polyethylene (without anchorage studs) were consecutively implanted between 1988 and 2004 in 134 patients (111 females and 23 males) in our center according to the indications established in 1988, using the same technique for each surgery. The patients’ mean age was 72.2 years (range, 25–90 years). The review rate was 83.7% (144 UKAs), with a mean follow-up of 62.3 months (range, 24–160 months). The series included 84 medial UKAs and 60 lateral UKAs. The clinical data were analyzed using the IKS criteria and the patients had a complete radiological evaluation before surgery and at the last follow-up.

Results

The rate of satisfied or very satisfied patients was 97.2%. No pain or slight pain was found in 81% of the cases. The mean flexion was 133° (range, 85–150°). The mean knee score varied from 63.6 before surgery to 91.5 (90.4 for medial UKAs and 92.9 for lateral UKAs) and the function score from 63.6 to 83.8 (84.7 for medial UKAs and 82.6 for lateral UKAs). The mean range of motion was 133° (range, 85–150°), better than the medial UKAs for osteonecrosis. The mean residual deformity was 4° varus for the medial UKAs and 2° valgus for the lateral UKAs. A radiolucency was found in 23% of the cases (20% tibial and 3% femoral), nonprogressive in all cases. In 87.2% of the cases, the opposite femorotibial compartment remained radiologically normal. No progression to osteoarthritis in the femoropatellar joint required additional surgery. Sixteen patients required revision surgery: in six cases, the implant was removed and a total prosthesis implanted (one late infection, one case of involvement of the opposite compartment, and four cases of tibial component loosening). In the other cases, one tibial baseplate was changed, five arthroscopies were done, and four unicompartmental knee replacements were done on the opposite compartment. The Kaplan-Meier survival rate (taking into account the revisions with implant change) was 95.6. The results of this series were very satisfactory and were similar to recent series in the world literature that showed survival rates between 90 and 98% at 10 years, rates that are equivalent to those found for total knee replacements. The mean flexion range of motion found was higher than the majority of other recent series, probably because of the precise patient selection in the present study, a minimally invasive approach, and the femoral implant design with an ascending condylar posterior cut. The deterioration of the contralateral compartment is frequently reported, but was perhaps prevented by the absence of overcorrection and patient selection. In this series, none of the UKAs was revised for wear. We explain this by the systematic preservation of a moderate undercorrection, particularly for medial UKAs, the quality of the polyethylene, and a selection based on patient weight and age.

Conclusions

The option of an all-polyethylene tibial implant, with minimal bone cuts (femoral resurfacing), makes excellent long-term results possible.

Level of Evidence: Level IV. Therapeutic Study.

El texto completo de este artículo está disponible en PDF.

Keywords : Unicompartmental replacement, Knee


Esquema


© 2008  Elsevier Masson SAS. Reservados todos los derechos.
Añadir a mi biblioteca Eliminar de mi biblioteca Imprimir
Exportación

    Exportación citas

  • Fichero

  • Contenido

Vol 95 - N° 1

P. 12-21 - février 2009 Regresar al número
Artículo precedente Artículo precedente
  • Skeletal landmarks for TKR implantations: Evaluation of their accuracy using EOS imaging acquisition system
  • B. Schlatterer, I. Suedhoff, X. Bonnet, Y. Catonne, M. Maestro, W. Skalli
| Artículo siguiente Artículo siguiente
  • Four-strand hamstring tendon autograft for ACL reconstruction in patients aged 50 years or older
  • C. Trojani, J.-C. Sané, J.-S. Coste, P. Boileau

Bienvenido a EM-consulte, la referencia de los profesionales de la salud.

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Mi cuenta


Declaración CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM se declara a la CNIL, la declaración N º 1286925.

En virtud de la Ley N º 78-17 del 6 de enero de 1978, relativa a las computadoras, archivos y libertades, usted tiene el derecho de oposición (art.26 de la ley), el acceso (art.34 a 38 Ley), y correcta (artículo 36 de la ley) los datos que le conciernen. Por lo tanto, usted puede pedir que se corrija, complementado, clarificado, actualizado o suprimido información sobre usted que son inexactos, incompletos, engañosos, obsoletos o cuya recogida o de conservación o uso está prohibido.
La información personal sobre los visitantes de nuestro sitio, incluyendo su identidad, son confidenciales.
El jefe del sitio en el honor se compromete a respetar la confidencialidad de los requisitos legales aplicables en Francia y no de revelar dicha información a terceros.


Todo el contenido en este sitio: Copyright © 2025 Elsevier, sus licenciantes y colaboradores. Se reservan todos los derechos, incluidos los de minería de texto y datos, entrenamiento de IA y tecnologías similares. Para todo el contenido de acceso abierto, se aplican los términos de licencia de Creative Commons.