Reliability and validity of commonly used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

2021 ◽  
pp. 103096
Author(s):  
Wang Deng ◽  
Hongyi Shao ◽  
Yixin Zhou ◽  
Hua Li ◽  
Zhaolun Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Mid-Term Evaluation of the Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty in Patients with BMI of 40 or Greater

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akshay Seth ◽  
Johanna Dobransky ◽  
Waleed Albishi ◽  
Geoffrey F. Dervin
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Patient Reported

AbstractLimited evidence is available on mid-term follow-up for patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 40 receiving a unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). The primary objective of this study was to investigate survival of the UKA in patients with BMI ≥ 40. Secondary objectives were to assess functional and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Survival analysis with endpoint revision of any component for any reason was conducted using Kaplan–Meier technique on 121 knees (103 patients) that underwent UKA with Oxford Phase 3 implant (Oxford Knee, Biomet, Swindon, United Kingdom) between September 2001 and March 2014 by seven surgeons. Survivorship differences were compared using Log Rank (Mantel-Cox) tests, and Cox Proportional Hazard Model was used to assess predictors of failure. Preoperative PROMs were compared at 2 and 5 years postoperatively using paired t-tests. Mean age of patients was 58 years (43–75), mean BMI 43 kg/m2 (40–51), and mean follow-up 7 years (2 months to 15 years). Survival rate for the whole cohort was 92% at 2 years and 86% at 5 years. Females had a significantly higher revision rate than males (p = 0.043). A total of 19 knees required revision (16 to TKA, 2 polyethylene liner exchanges, and 1 femoral component and liner revision). With respect to PROMs, there was a significant improvement at 2 and 5 years (p < 0.001) on 4 of 5 knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score subscales. The mid-term survival rate for the Oxford UKA in patients with morbid obesity is similar to that of other nondesigner patient series with BMI ≥ 30, which provides further evidence for the safety of the implant in this patient population with significant improvements on PROMs at short and mid-term follow-up.

scholarly journals 3D printing and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 248-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth G. Jones ◽  
Susannah Clarke ◽  
Martin Jaere ◽  
Justin Cobb
Keyword(s):  
3D Printing ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Patient Specific Instrumentation ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Total Knee

In suitable patients, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) offers a number of advantages compared with total knee arthroplasty. However, the procedure is technically demanding, with a small tolerance for error. Assistive technology has the potential to improve the accuracy of implant positioning. This review paper describes the concept of detailed UKA planning in 3D, and the 3D printing technology that enables a plan to be delivered intraoperatively using patient-specific instrumentation (PSI). The varying guide designs that enable accurate registration are discussed and described. The system accuracy is reported. Future studies need to ascertain whether accuracy for low-volume surgeons can be delivered in the operating theatre using PSI, and reflected in improved patient reported outcome measures, and lower revision rates.Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.180001

scholarly journals Robotic arm-assisted versus conventional medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: five-year clinical outcomes of a randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 103-B (6) ◽  
pp. 1088-1095 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Banger ◽  
James Doonan ◽  
Philip Rowe ◽  
Bryn Jones ◽  
Angus MacLean ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Robotic Arm ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Patient Reported

Aims Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a bone-preserving treatment option for osteoarthritis localized to a single compartment in the knee. The success of the procedure is sensitive to patient selection and alignment errors. Robotic arm-assisted UKA provides technological assistance to intraoperative bony resection accuracy, which is thought to improve ligament balancing. This paper presents the five-year outcomes of a comparison between manual and robotically assisted UKAs. Methods The trial design was a prospective, randomized, parallel, single-centre study comparing surgical alignment in patients undergoing UKA for the treatment of medial compartment osteoarthritis (ISRCTN77119437). Participants underwent surgery using either robotic arm-assisted surgery or conventional manual instrumentation. The primary outcome measure (surgical accuracy) has previously been reported, and, along with secondary outcomes, were collected at one-, two-, and five-year timepoints. Analysis of five-year results and longitudinal analysis for all timepoints was performed to compare the two groups. Results Overall, 104 (80%) patients of the original 130 who received surgery were available at five years (55 robotic, 49 manual). Both procedures reported successful results over all outcomes. At five years, there were no statistical differences between the groups in any of the patient reported or clinical outcomes. There was a lower reintervention rate in the robotic arm-assisted group with 0% requiring further surgery compared with six (9%) of the manual group requiring additional surgical intervention (p < 0.001). Conclusion This study has shown excellent clinical outcomes in both groups with no statistical or clinical differences in the patient-reported outcome measures. The notable difference was the lower reintervention rate at five years for roboticarm-assisted UKA when compared with a manual approach. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1088–1095.

scholarly journals High usage of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty negatively influences total knee arthroplasty revision rate

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Klasan ◽  
Mei Lin Tay ◽  
Chris Frampton ◽  
Simon William Young
Keyword(s):  
Total Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Revision Rate ◽  
Oxford Knee Score ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Total Knee

Abstract Purpose Surgeons with higher medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) usage have lower UKA revision rates. However, an increase in UKA usage may cause a decrease of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) usage. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of UKA usage on revision rates and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) of UKA, TKA, and combined UKA + TKA results. Methods Using the New Zealand Registry Database, surgeons were divided into six groups based on their medial UKA usage: < 1%, 1–5%, 5–10%, 10–20%, 20–30% and > 30%. A comparison of UKA, TKA and UKA + TKA revision rates and PROMs using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) was performed. Results A total of 91,895 knee arthroplasties were identified, of which 8,271 were UKA (9.0%). Surgeons with higher UKA usage had lower UKA revision rates, but higher TKA revision rates. The lowest TKA and combined UKA + TKA revision rates were observed for surgeons performing 1–5% UKA, compared to the highest TKA and UKA + TKA revision rates which were seen for surgeons using > 30% UKA (p < 0.001 TKA; p < 0.001 UKA + TKA). No clinically important differences in UKA + TKA OKS scores were seen between UKA usage groups at 6 months, 5 years, or 10 years. Conclusion Surgeons with higher medial UKA usage have lower UKA revision rates; however, this comes at the cost of a higher combined UKA + TKA revision rate that is proportionate to the UKA usage. There was no difference in TKA + UKA OKS scores between UKA usage groups. A small increase in TKA revision rate was observed for high-volume UKA users (> 30%), when compared to other UKA usage clusters. A significant decrease in UKA revision rate observed in high-volume UKA surgeons offsets the slight increase in TKA revision rate, suggesting that UKA should be performed by specialist UKA surgeons. Level of evidence III, Retrospective therapeutic study.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document