Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Total versus unicompartmental knee replacement for isolated lateral osteoarthritis: a matched-pairs study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the functional outcome of patients following unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) using the Oxford domed lateral UKR to patients who underwent cruciate-retaining total knee replacement (TKR) for isolated osteoarthritis in the lateral compartment.

Methods

With the help of our institutional database, we retrospectively identified 22 matched pairs with regards to age, gender and body mass index (BMI). Functional outcome was measured using the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and range of motion (ROM). Complications and revisions were recorded.

Results

The mean follow-up was 22 (UKR) and 19 (TKR) months, respectively. Patients following UKR had a statistically significant higher mean postoperative OKS and ROM: mean OKS was 43 [standard deviation (SD) 4] for UKR and 37 (SD 9) for TKR, respectively (p = 0.023); ROM was 127° (SD 13) for UKR and 107° (SD 17) for TKR (p < 0.001). Additionally the change in score was statistically significant higher in patients following UKR in the OKS (14.3 (SD 6) vs. 9.6 (SD 8)) and in the range of motion (+12° (SD 19) vs. −3° (SD 20)), (p = 0.041 and p = 0.01 respectively). Survival at two years using revision for any reason as the endpoint was 96 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 72–99] for UKR and 100 % for TKR (Log-rank test, p = 0.317).

Conclusion

The functional results of mobile-bearing UKR for isolated osteoarthritis in the lateral compartment compare favourably to those after cruciate-retaining TKR in the short term. To compare survival and complications after both procedures, longer-term follow-up is necessary.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Parsch D, Kruger M, Moser MT, Geiger F (2009) Follow-up of 11–16 years after modular fixed-bearing TKA. Int Orthop 33(2):431–435. doi:10.1007/s00264-008-0543-x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Newman JH, Ackroyd CE, Shah NA (1998) Unicompartmental or total knee replacement? Five-year results of a prospective, randomised trial of 102 osteoarthritic knees with unicompartmental arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 80(5):862–865

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Amin AK, Patton JT, Cook RE, Gaston M, Brenkel IJ (2006) Unicompartmental or total knee arthroplasty?: Results from a matched study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 451:101–106. doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000224052.01873.20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Servien E, Aitsiselmi T, Neyret P, Verdonk P (2008) How to select candidates for lateral unicompartmental prosthesis. Curr Orthop Pract 19 (4):451–458 410.1097

  5. Heyse TJ, Tibesku CO (2010) Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130(12):1539–1548. doi:10.1007/s00402-010-1137-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Knutson K, Robertsson O (2010) The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 81(1):5–7. doi:10.3109/17453671003667267

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Robertsson O, Borgquist L, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L (1999) Use of unicompartmental instead of tricompartmental prostheses for unicompartmental arthrosis in the knee is a cost-effective alternative. 15,437 primary tricompartmental prostheses were compared with 10,624 primary medial or lateral unicompartmental prostheses. Acta Orthop Scand 70(2):170–175

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lyons MC, MacDonald SJ, Somerville LE, Naudie DD, McCalden RW (2012) Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty database analysis: is there a winner? Clin Orthop Relat Res 470(1):84–90. doi:10.1007/s11999-011-2144-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Price AJ, Webb J, Topf H, Dodd CA, Goodfellow JW, Murray DW, Oxford H, Knee G (2001) Rapid recovery after oxford unicompartmental arthroplasty through a short incision. J Arthroplasty 16(8):970–976

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Walton NP, Jahromi I, Lewis PL, Dobson PJ, Angel KR, Campbell DG (2006) Patient-perceived outcomes and return to sport and work: TKA versus mini-incision unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 19(2):112–116

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Newman J, Pydisetty RV, Ackroyd C (2009) Unicompartmental or total knee replacement: the 15-year results of a prospective randomised controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 91(1):52–57. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.91B1.20899

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ollivier M, Abdel MP, Parratte S, Argenson JN (2014) Lateral unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA): contemporary indications, surgical technique, and results. Int Orthop 38(2):449–455. doi:10.1007/s00264-013-2222-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Victor J, Ghijselings S, Tajdar F, Van Damme G, Deprez P, Arnout N, Van Der Straeten C (2014) Total knee arthroplasty at 15–17 years: does implant design affect outcome? Int Orthop 38(2):235–241. doi:10.1007/s00264-013-2231-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Pandit H, Jenkins C, Barker K, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2006) The Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement using a minimally-invasive approach. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 88(1):54–60. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.88B1.17114

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Price AJ, Svard U (2011) A second decade lifetable survival analysis of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(1):174–179. doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1506-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Svard UC, Price AJ (2001) Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A survival analysis of an independent series. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83(2):191–194

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Gunther TV, Murray DW, Miller R, Wallace DA, Carr AJ, O'Connor JJ, McLardy-Smith P, Goodfellow JW (1996) Lateral unicompartmental arthroplasty with the Oxford meniscal knee. Knee 3(1–2):33–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Pandit H, Jenkins C, Beard DJ, Price AJ, Gill HS, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2010) Mobile bearing dislocation in lateral unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee 17(6):392–397. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2009.10.007

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Streit MR, Walker T, Bruckner T, Merle C, Kretzer JP, Clarius M, Aldinger PR, Gotterbarm T (2012) Mobile-bearing lateral unicompartmental knee replacement with the Oxford domed tibial component: an independent series. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 94(10):1356–1361. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.94B10.29119

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Schelfaut S, Beckers L, Verdonk P, Bellemans J, Victor J (2013) The risk of bearing dislocation in lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using a mobile biconcave design. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(11):2487–2494. doi:10.1007/s00167-012-2171-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Altuntas AO, Alsop H, Cobb JP (2013) Early results of a domed tibia, mobile bearing lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty from an independent centre. Knee 20(6):466–470. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2012.11.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Weston-Simons JS, Pandit H, Kendrick BJ, Jenkins C, Barker K, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2014) The mid-term outcomes of the Oxford Domed Lateral unicompartmental knee replacement. Bone Joint J 96-B(1):59–64. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.96B1.31630

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Murray DW, Fitzpatrick R, Rogers K, Pandit H, Beard DJ, Carr AJ, Dawson J (2007) The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 89(8):1010–1014. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.89B8.19424

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Duwelius PJ, Burkhart RL, Hayhurst JO, Moller H, Butler JB (2007) Comparison of the 2-incision and mini-incision posterior total hip arthroplasty technique: a retrospective match-pair controlled study. J Arthroplasty 22(1):48–56. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2006.09.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Manzotti A, Confalonieri N, Pullen C (2007) Unicompartmental versus computer-assisted total knee replacement for medial compartment knee arthritis: a matched paired study. Int Orthop 31(3):315–319. doi:10.1007/s00264-006-0184-x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Brown NM, Sheth NP, Davis K, Berend ME, Lombardi AV, Berend KR, Della Valle CJ (2012) Total knee arthroplasty has higher postoperative morbidity than unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a multicenter analysis. J Arthroplasty 27(8 Suppl):86–90. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2012.03.022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lombardi AV Jr, Berend KR, Walter CA, Aziz-Jacobo J, Cheney NA (2009) Is recovery faster for mobile-bearing unicompartmental than total knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(6):1450–1457. doi:10.1007/s11999-009-0731-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Yang KY, Wang MC, Yeo SJ, Lo NN (2003) Minimally invasive unicondylar versus total condylar knee arthroplasty–early results of a matched-pair comparison. Singap Med J 44(11):559–562

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Scott CE, Howie CR, MacDonald D, Biant LC (2010) Predicting dissatisfaction following total knee replacement: a prospective study of 1217 patients. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 92(9):1253–1258. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.92B9.24394

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Parvizi J, Nunley RM, Berend KR, Lombardi AV Jr, Ruh EL, Clohisy JC, Hamilton WG, Della Valle CJ, Barrack RL (2014) High level of residual symptoms in young patients after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472(1):133–137. doi:10.1007/s11999-013-3229-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KD (2010) Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(1):57–63. doi:10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Keenan AC, Wood AM, Arthur CA, Jenkins PJ, Brenkel IJ, Walmsley PJ (2012) Ten-year survival of cemented total knee replacement in patients aged less than 55 years. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 94(7):928–931. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.94B7.27031

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Arthur CH, Wood AM, Keenan AC, Clayton RA, Walmsley P, Brenkel I (2013) Ten-year results of the Press Fit Condylar Sigma total knee replacement. Bone Joint J 95-B(2):177–180. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.95B2.29695

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Hanusch B, Lou TN, Warriner G, Hui A, Gregg P (2010) Functional outcome of PFC Sigma fixed and rotating-platform total knee arthroplasty. A prospective randomised controlled trial. Int Orthop 34(3):349–354. doi:10.1007/s00264-009-0901-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Dalury DF, Gonzales RA, Adams MJ, Gruen TA, Trier K (2008) Midterm results with the PFC Sigma total knee arthroplasty system. J Arthroplasty 23(2):175–181. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2007.03.039

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Zaki SH, Rafiq I, Kapoor A, Raut V, Gambhir AK, Porter ML (2007) Medium-term results with the Press Fit Condylar (PFC) Sigma knee prosthesis the Wrightington experience. Acta Orthop Belg 73(1):55–59

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Laurencin CT, Zelicof SB, Scott RD, Ewald FC (1991) Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty in the same patient. A comparative study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 273:151–156

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Maruyama S, Yoshiya S, Matsui N, Kuroda R, Kurosaka M (2004) Functional comparison of posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 19(3):349–353

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Bercik MJ, Joshi A, Parvizi J (2013) Posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 28(3):439–444. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2012.08.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Verra WC, van den Boom LG, Jacobs W, Clement DJ, Wymenga AA, Nelissen RG (2013) Retention versus sacrifice of the posterior cruciate ligament in total knee arthroplasty for treating osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10, CD004803. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004803.pub3

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Marson B, Prasad N, Jenkins R, Lewis M (2013) Lateral unicompartmental knee replacements: early results from a District General Hospital. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. doi:10.1007/s00590-013-1277-z

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

MRS was supported by the noncommercial research fund of Deutsche-Arthrose-Hilfe e.v. In addition, benefits were directed to a research fund by Biomet, Germany.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Schlierbacher Landstrasse 200a, 69118, Heidelberg, Germany

    Tilman Walker, Tobias Gotterbarm, Christian Merle & Marcus R. Streit

  2. Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 305, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    Thomas Bruckner

Authors
  1. Tilman Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tobias Gotterbarm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Bruckner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christian Merle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marcus R. Streit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcus R. Streit.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Walker, T., Gotterbarm, T., Bruckner, T. et al. Total versus unicompartmental knee replacement for isolated lateral osteoarthritis: a matched-pairs study. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 38, 2259–2264 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2473-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2473-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation