Comparison of gait kinetics in total and unicondylar knee replacement surgery

Miller, Stephen D.; Agarwal, Amil R.; Haddon, WB; Johnston, Linda; Arnold, Graham; Wang, W; Abboud, RJ

doi:10.1308/rcsann.2017.0226

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of 1289 studies eligible for inclusion in the abstract screen, 1201 were excluded for not meeting the inclusion criteria and repetition. After full text review, a further 28 studies were excluded,32 34 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 and 60 were included in the final analysis (fig 1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient relevant outcomes of unicompartmental versus total knee replacement: systematic review and meta-analysis

Wilson

Middleton

Abram

et al. 2019

BMJ

216

206

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To present a clear and comprehensive summary of the published data on unicompartmental knee replacement (UKA) or total knee replacement (TKA), comparing domains of outcome that have been shown to be important to patients and clinicians to allow informed decision making. Design Systematic review using data from randomised controlled trials, nationwide databases or joint registries, and large cohort studies. Data sources Medline, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), and Clinical Trials.gov, searched between 1 January 1997 and 31 December 2018. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Studies published in the past 20 years, comparing outcomes of primary UKA with TKA in adult patients. Studies were excluded if they involved fewer than 50 participants, or if translation into English was not available. Results 60 eligible studies were separated into three methodological groups: seven publications from six randomised controlled trials, 17 national joint registries and national database studies, and 36 cohort studies. Results for each domain of outcome varied depending on the level of data, and findings were not always significant. Analysis of the three groups of studies showed significantly shorter hospital stays after UKA than after TKA (−1.20 days (95% confidence interval −1.67 to −0.73), −1.43 (−1.53 to −1.33), and −1.73 (−2.30 to −1.16), respectively). There was no significant difference in pain, based on patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), but significantly better functional PROM scores for UKA than for TKA in both non-trial groups (standard mean difference −0.58 (−0.88 to −0.27) and −0.29 (−0.46 to −0.11), respectively). Regarding major complications, trials and cohort studies had non-significant results, but mortality after TKA was significantly higher in registry and large database studies (risk ratio 0.27 (0.16 to 0.45)), as were venous thromboembolic events (0.39 (0.27 to 0.57)) and major cardiac events (0.22 (0.06 to 0.86)). Early reoperation for any reason was higher after TKA than after UKA, but revision rates at five years remained higher for UKA in all three study groups (risk ratio 5.95 (1.29 to 27.59), 2.50 (1.77 to 3.54), and 3.13 (1.89 to 5.17), respectively). Conclusions TKA and UKA are both viable options for the treatment of isolated unicompartmental osteoarthritis. By directly comparing the two treatments, this study demonstrates better results for UKA in several outcome domains. However, the risk of revision surgery was lower for TKA. This information should be available to patients as part of the shared decision making process in choosing treatment options. Systematic review registration PROSPERO number CRD42018089972.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient relevant outcomes of unicompartmental versus total knee replacement: systematic review and meta-analysis

Wilson

Middleton

Abram

et al. 2019

BMJ

216

206

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Unicompartmental Knee Replacement and Return to Sport

Shatrov,

Batailler,

Servien

et al. 2024

Orthopaedic Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The extensor efficiency of unicompartmental, bicompartmental, and total knee arthroplasty

Garner

Dandridge

Amis

et al. 2021

Bone & Joint Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (BCA) have been associated with improved functional outcomes compared to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in suitable patients, although the reason is poorly understood. The aim of this study was to measure how the different arthroplasties affect knee extensor function. Methods Extensor function was measured for 16 cadaveric knees and then retested following the different arthroplasties. Eight knees underwent medial UKA then BCA, then posterior-cruciate retaining TKA, and eight underwent the lateral equivalents then TKA. Extensor efficiency was calculated for ranges of knee flexion associated with common activities of daily living. Data were analyzed with repeated measures analysis of variance (α = 0.05). Results Compared to native, there were no reductions in either extension moment or efficiency following UKA. Conversion to BCA resulted in a small decrease in extension moment between 70° and 90° flexion (p < 0.05), but when examined in the context of daily activity ranges of flexion, extensor efficiency was largely unaffected. Following TKA, large decreases in extension moment were measured at low knee flexion angles (p < 0.05), resulting in 12% to 43% reductions in extensor efficiency for the daily activity ranges. Conclusion This cadaveric study found that TKA resulted in inferior extensor function compared to UKA and BCA. This may, in part, help explain the reported differences in function and satisfaction differences between partial and total knee arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(1):1–9.

show abstract

Comparison of gait kinetics in total and unicondylar knee replacement surgery

Cited by 3 publications

References 17 publications

Patient relevant outcomes of unicompartmental versus total knee replacement: systematic review and meta-analysis

Patient relevant outcomes of unicompartmental versus total knee replacement: systematic review and meta-analysis

Unicompartmental Knee Replacement and Return to Sport

The extensor efficiency of unicompartmental, bicompartmental, and total knee arthroplasty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About