Long-term Clinical Results of the Medial Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

2005 ◽  
Vol &NA; (435) ◽  
pp. 171-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
A J Price ◽  
J C Waite ◽  
U Svard
Keyword(s):  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

scholarly journals Clinical Results of Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

2008 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 635-638
Author(s):  
Tetsuya Fukumoto ◽  
Kazutoshi Nomura ◽  
Noburo Hashimoto ◽  
Satoshi Maeda ◽  
Haruhiko Chuma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

scholarly journals Bearing Thickness Is Not a Predictive Factor for Damage and Penetration in Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty—A Retrieval Analysis

Materials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (20) ◽  
pp. 4589
Author(s):  
Johannes Adrian Eckert ◽  
Ulrike Mueller ◽  
Tilman Walker ◽  
Martin Schwarze ◽  
Sebastian Jaeger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aseptic Loosening ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Material Loss ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Direct Light ◽  
Total Knee ◽  
Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

The medial Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (OUKA) shows good survivorship, as well as clinical results. Aseptic loosening, however, remains one of the main reasons for revision and polyethylene debris is known to cause aseptic loosening. The role of bearing thickness in total as well as unicondylar knee arthroplasty has been the subject of controversial discussions, especially the longevity of lower thickness bearings in total knee arthroplasty was questioned. The purpose of this study was to assess the influence of bearing thickness on time to revision, damage pattern, penetration, and volumetric material loss. A cohort of 47 consecutively retrieved medial OUKA bearings was analyzed with conventional direct light microscopy applying the Hood damage analysis, as well as measuring the penetration depth. In this retrieval cohort, a difference on survival time, damage, penetration, as well as volumetric material loss could not be seen. We conclude that low as well as high thickness bearings can safely be used in OUKA without any relevant differences in terms of wear and damage.

scholarly journals Cemented versus Uncemented Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Is There a Difference?

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Burak Akan ◽  
Dogac Karaguven ◽  
Berk Guclu ◽  
Tugrul Yildirim ◽  
Alper Kaya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Knee Prostheses ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Purpose. The use of uncemented unicompartmental knee prostheses has recently increased. However, few studies on the outcomes of uncemented unicompartmental knee prostheses have been performed. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of cemented and uncemented Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.Materials and Methods. This retrospective observational study evaluated the clinical and radiological outcomes of 263 medial Oxford unicompartmental prostheses (141 cemented, 122 uncemented) implanted in 235 patients. The mean follow-up was 42 months in the cemented group and 30 months in the uncemented group.Results. At the last follow-up, there were no significant differences in the clinical results or survival rates between the two groups. However, the operation time in the uncemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty group was shorter than that in the cemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty group. In addition, the cost of uncemented arthroplasty was greater.Conclusion. Despite the successful midterm results in the uncemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty group, a longer follow-up period is required to determine the best fixation mode.

scholarly journals Complications, Reasons for Reoperation, and 5-Year Prosthesis Survival Compared Between the Cemented and Cementless Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Fixation Techniques at Thailand’s Largest National Tertiary Referral Center

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jirayu Paugchawee ◽  
Chaturong Pornrattanamaneewong ◽  
Pakpoom Ruangsomboon ◽  
Rapeepat Narkbunnam ◽  
Keerati Chareancholvanich
Keyword(s):  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Unicompartmental Knee ◽  
Prosthesis Survival ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Abstract Background: Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (OUKA) yields favorable outcomes in patients with medial compartmental knee osteoarthritis; however, it remains unknown whether cemented or cementless OUKA fixation delivers better outcomes in Asian population. Accordingly, this study aimed to investigate the complications, reasons for reoperation, and 5-year prosthesis survival compared between cemented and cementless OUKA in Thai patients.Methods: A total of 466 cemented and 36 cementless OUKA that were performed during 2011-2015 with a minimum follow-up of five years were included. With reoperation for any reason as the endpoint, Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to compare 5-year implant survival between groups. Complications, reasons for reoperation, and 90-day morbidity and mortality were compared between groups. Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify independent predictors of implant survival.Results: There was no significant difference in 5-year implant survival between the cemented and cementless groups (96.4% vs. 94.4%, p=0.375). The mean implant survival time was 113.0±0.8 and 70.8±1.9 months in the cemented and cementless groups, respectively (p=0.383). The most common reason for reoperation was bearing dislocation, and only one patient had 90-day morbidity. There was no significant difference between groups for complications or reasons for reoperation. No independent predictors of implant survival were identified in multivariate analysis.Conclusions: OUKA was shown to be a safe and durable reconstructive procedure in Thai patients with medial compartmental knee osteoarthritis. There was no significant difference in implant survival between the cemented and cementless groups during the 5-year follow-up, and no independent predictors of implant survival were identified. Trial registration: Thai Clinical Trials Registry, TCTR20200427004. Registered 27 April 2020 – Retrospectively registered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document