Systematic review of medial versus lateral survivorship in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

List, Jelle P. van der; McDonald, Lucas S.; Pearle, Andrew D.

doi:10.1016/j.knee.2015.09.011

Cited by 95 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 103 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Patellofemoral joint is not mentioned sufficiently despite a change in indications. Major goal of unicondylar knee arthroplasty is to fill osteochondral defects while preserving the shape and measure of femoral condyle and to reconstruct the joint surface of affected compartment (16,20,21). Despite the fact that actual affected compartment is the medial one, there are various degrees of degenerative findings at the patellofemoral compartment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Fixed-Bearing and Mobile-Bearing Tibial Insert in Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty

Çatma¹,

Aksekili²,

Kılınçarslan³

et al. 2016

Acta Med Anatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Fixed-Bearing and Mobile-Bearing Tibial Insert in Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty

Çatma¹,

Aksekili²,

Kılınçarslan³

et al. 2016

Acta Med Anatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…UKA is most frequently performed on the medial tibiofemoral articulation (90%) 11 31. There are many variables in the surgical technique of UKA, including differences between cemented or uncemented fixation, mobile-bearing or fixed-bearing design, metal backed or all-polyethylene tibial components and conventional or robotic implant positioning (boxes 2– 4).…”

Section: Current State Of the Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conventional manual techniques have been routinely used in UKA surgery with implant position and alignment critical to short-term and long-term outcomes 31 51 71. These variables are most often manually controlled with the aid of extramedullary and intramedullary alignment guides.…”

Section: Current State Of the Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, many authors emphasise different fixation methods, prostheses designs and new technologies (eg, robot-assisted surgery) as is shown in box 1.

Key articles on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA)▸ Insall and Walker19 introduced the first unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the 1970s.▸ In 1989, Kozinn and Scott22 described the strict patient selection criteria for UKA after disappointing results from the past.▸ Murray et al 24 reported 10-year survivorship of 98%, showing that long-term outcomes of UKA can be achieved in strictly selected patients.▸ Pandit et al 27 demonstrated the unnecessary contraindications for mobile-bearing UKA, and thereby proposed to expand the indications for UKA.▸ Liddle et al 28 showed good-to-excellent results at 10-year follow-up of 1000 cementless UKAs after resurgence of interest in the late 1990s.▸ Chatellard et al 29 emphasised the high level of accuracy required for optimal position of the tibial component, to restore knee kinematics and prevent implant wear.▸ Pearle et al 30 were the first to demonstrate successful robot-assisted UKA placement in a series of 10 patients, showing improvement of the accuracy in regard to component positioning and leg alignment.▸ van der List et al 31 performed a systematic review demonstrating high survivorship rates of medial and lateral UKA, combined with high functional outcomes scores.▸ Epinette et al 32 identified modes of failure of UKA in a large French multicentre study. They assessed the differences between early, mid-term and late stages of the arthroplasty.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…▸ van der List et al 31 performed a systematic review demonstrating high survivorship rates of medial and lateral UKA, combined with high functional outcomes scores.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: state of the art

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The popularity of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) for the treatment of isolated compartment osteoarthritis of the knee has risen over the past 2 decades. Currently, UKA covers 10% of all knee arthroplasties worldwide. Although indications have been extended, results have proven that patient selection plays a critical role in the success of UKA. From the current perspective, age, body mass index, patellofemoral osteoarthritis, anterior cruciate ligament deficiency and chondrocalcinosis are no longer absolute contraindications for UKA. Motivated by the desire to improve survivorship rates, patient-reported outcomes and reduce complications, there have been many technological advances in the field of UKA over the recent years. The aim of this review was to evaluate the current indications, surgical techniques, modes of failure and survivorship results of UKA, by assessing a thorough review of modern literature. Several studies show that innovations in implant design, fixation methods and surgical techniques have led to good-to-excellent long-term survivorship, functional outcomes and less complications. Until now, resurgence of interest of cementless designs is noted according to large national registries to address problems associated with cementation. The future perspective on the usage of UKA, in particular the cementless design, looks promising. Furthermore, there is a growing interest in robotic-assisted techniques in order to optimise result by controlled soft-tissue balancing and reproduce alignment in UKA. Future advances in robotics, most likely in the field of planning and setup, will be valuable in optimising patient-specific UKA.

show abstract