Dataset Information

Survival of medial versus lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Many studies have found associations between unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and implant survival, but controversy still exists regarding the relative survival of medial versus lateral UKA over mid-to long-term follow-up. The purpose of this study was to compare survival and clinical outcomes of medial and lateral UKAs. In this meta-analysis, we reviewed studies that assessed implant survival in patients who underwent medial or lateral UKA with short- to mid-term (<10years) or long-term (>10years) follow-up, and that used assessments, such as pain and function scores, to compare postoperative scores on knee outcome scales. A total of eight studies (33,999 knees with medial UKA and 2,853 with lateral UKA) met the inclusion criteria and was analyzed in detail. There were no significant differences between medial and lateral UKA in pain score (95% CI: -0.37 to 0.88; P = 0.42), function score (95% CI: -0.19 to 0.60; P = 0.31), short- to mid-term survival (medial, 32,083/33,483; lateral, 2,636/2,726; OR 0.98, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.48;P = 0.91), or long-term survival (medial, 479/516; lateral, 110/127; OR 2.51, 95% CI:0.67 to 9.43; P = 0.17). In addition, both groups had substantial proportions of knees with short- to mid-term survival (95.6% by medial UKA and 94.6% by lateral UKA) and long-term survival (92.8% by medial UKA and 86.6% by lateral UKA). This meta-analysis found no significant differences in short- to mid-term and long-term survival of medial and lateral UKAs. Similarly, patients treated with medial UKA showed no difference in pain relief or functional improvement compared to patients treated with lateral UKA. These results suggest that both UKA techniques are viable treatment options for patients with unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis over long-term follow-up, although further high-quality studies are needed to address some remaining uncertainties regarding the clinical benefits of these procedures.

SUBMITTER: Han SB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6980580 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Survival of medial versus lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis.

Han Seung-Beom SB Lee Sang-Soo SS Kim Kyoung-Ho KH Im Jung-Taek JT Park Phil-Sun PS Shin Young-Soo YS

PloS one 20200124 1

Many studies have found associations between unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and implant survival, but controversy still exists regarding the relative survival of medial versus lateral UKA over mid-to long-term follow-up. The purpose of this study was to compare survival and clinical outcomes of medial and lateral UKAs. In this meta-analysis, we reviewed studies that assessed implant survival in patients who underwent medial or lateral UKA with short- to mid-term (<10years) or long-term ...[more]

PMID: 31978110

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeThe primary goal of this study is to compare clinical outcomes, complication rate, and survivorship in octogenarians who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) by performing a matched cohort analysis.MethodsWe analyzed 75 medial UKAs performed by a single experienced surgeon. The included cases were matched with 75 TKAs performed during the same study period. Potential TKA matches used identical exclusion criteria. UKAs were age-, gender-, and body mass index (BMI)-matched at the rate of 1 UKA to 1 TKA from our departmental database. Clinical evaluation included the visual analog scale for pain, range of motion (ROM-flexion and extension), Knee Society Score (KSS), and Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Each patient was clinically evaluated on the day before the surgery (T0) and at two follow-ups at least 12 months (T1) and 24 months (T2) after the surgery. For the survivorship, revision was defined as failure of the implant (periprosthetic joint infection, periprosthetic fracture, or aseptic loosening), and survival was based on implant revision or patient death. Undesirable clinical developments that were not present at baseline or that increased in severity after treatment were classified as adverse events.ResultsThe mean age at the time of the surgery was 82.1 ± 1.9 years for UKA and 81.5 ± 1.8 years for TKA (p = 0.06). The two groups differed in regard to surgical time (UKA 44.9 ± 7.2 min; TKA 54.4 ± 11.3 min; p < 0.001); furthermore, the UKA group showed better function (ROM; flexion and extension) than the TKA group at each follow-up time point (p < 0.05). Both groups reported a significant improvement in all clinical scores (KSS and OKS) when compared with their preoperative status (p < 0.05), while no differences were found between the groups at each follow-up (p > 0.05). The UKA group reported 7 (9.3%) failures, while TKA reported 6 failures. There were no survival differences between the groups (T1: p = 0.2; T2: p = 0.5). Overall complication rate was 6% in the UKA group versus 9.75% in TKA (p = 0.2).ConclusionThe UKA and TKA patients had similar clinical outcomes, post-operative range of motion, and survivorship in octogenarians with medial knee osteoarthritis, with comparable complication rate. Both the surgical procedures may be considered in this patient population, but further long-term follow-up is needed.Level of evidenceLevel III.

Project description:ObjectiveThe primary objective of the trial was to assess the clinical effectiveness of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus total knee arthroplasty in patients with isolated medial osteoarthritis of the knee.DesignProspective, randomised, 2 years, assessor-blind, multicentre, superiority trial.SettingThe patients were enrolled between December 2015 and May 2018 from the outpatient clinics of three public high-volume arthroplasty hospitals (Finland).ParticipantsWe recruited 143 patients with symptomatic-isolated medial osteoarthritis of the knee needing an arthroplasty procedure. All the patients were suitable for both unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasties. Population was selected as the end-stage-isolated medial osteoarthritis.InterventionsAll patients, randomized 1:1, received a medial unicompartmental arthroplasty or a total knee arthroplasty through a similar midline skin incision. Patients were blinded to the type of arthroplasty for the whole 2 years of follow-up.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome measure was between-group differences in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and secondary outcome Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Score (KOOS) at 2 years postoperatively. The changes within and between the groups were analysed with analysis of variance for repeated measurements.ResultsThe primary outcome was comparable for medial unicompartmental arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty at 2 years. The mean difference in the OKS between the groups was 1.6 points (95% CI -0.7 to 3.9). In the KOOS subscales, the mean difference between the groups was 0.1 points (95% CI -4.8 to 5.0) for pain, 7.8 points (95% CI 1.5 to 14.0) for symptoms, 4.3 points (95% CI -0.6 to 9.2) for function in daily living, 4.3 points (95% CI -3.0 to 11.6) for function in sports, and 2.1 points (95% CI -4.8 to 9.1) for knee-related quality of life.ConclusionsThe recovery after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty was faster compared with total knee arthroplasty, but unicompartmental arthroplasty did not provide a better patient-reported outcome at 2 years.Trial registration numberNCT02481427.

Project description:BackgroundThere remains a paucity of clinical studies assessing how any differences in accuracy of implant positioning between robotic-arm assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RO UKA) and conventional jig-based unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (CO UKA) translate to patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, and implant survivorship. The objectives of this study are to compare accuracy of implant positioning, limb alignment, patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, implant survivorship, cost-effectiveness, and complications in CO UKA versus RO UKA. Computer navigation will be used to assess intraoperative knee kinematics in all patients undergoing CO UKA.Methods and analysisThis prospective randomised controlled trial will include 140 patients with symptomatic medial compartment knee arthritis undergoing primary UKA. Following informed consent, patients will be randomised to CO UKA (control group) or RO UKA (investigation group) at a ratio of 1:1 using an online random number generator. The primary objective of this study is to compare accuracy of implant positioning in CO UKA versus RO UKA. The secondary objectives are to compare the following outcomes between the two treatment groups: limb alignment, surgical efficiency, postoperative functional rehabilitation, functional outcomes, quality of life, range of motion, resource use, cost effectivness, and complications. Observers will review patients at regular intervals for 2 years after surgery to record predefined study outcomes pertaining to these objectives. Ethical approval was obtained from the London-Bloomsbury Research Ethics Committee, UK. The study is sponsored by University College London, UK.DiscussionThis study compares a comprehensive and robust range of clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes in CO UKA versus RO UKA. The findings of this study will provide an improved understanding of the differences in CO UKA versus RO UKA with respect to accuracy of implant positioning, patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, implant survivorship, cost-effectiveness, and complications.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04095637 . Registered on 19 September 2019.

Project description:BackgroundPatellofemoral joint (PFJ) degeneration has traditionally been regarded as a contraindication to unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). More recently, some researchers have proposed that PFJ degeneration can be ignored in medial UKA, and others have proposed that this change should be reviewed in PFJ degenerative facets and severity. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the effect of PFJ degeneration on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and revision rates after medial UKA.MethodsElectronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, etc.) were searched for studies assessing the influence of PFJ degeneration on medial UKA. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted for the Oxford knee score (OKS), Knee society score (KSS), and revision rates and stratified by PFJ degenerative facets (medial/lateral/trochlear/unspecified), severe PFJ degeneration (bone exposed), and bearing type (mobile/fixed). Heterogeneity was assessed by the Cochran Q test statistic and chi-squared tests with the I-squared statistic.ResultsA total of 34 articles with 7007 knees (2267 with PFJ degeneration) were included (5762 mobile-bearing and 1145 fixed-bearing and 100 unspecified). Slight to moderate degenerative changes in the medial and trochlear facets did not decrease the OKS and KSS, and only lateral facets significantly decreased the OKS (mean difference [MD] = -2.18, P < 0.01) and KSS (MD = -2.61, P < 0.01). The severity degree of PFJ degeneration had no additional adverse effect on the OKS, KSS, or revision rates. For mobile-bearing UKA, only lateral PFJ degeneration significantly decreased the OKS (MD = -2.21, P < 0.01) and KSS (MD = -2.44, P < 0.01). For fixed-bearing UKA, no correlation was found between PROMs/revision rates and PFJ degeneration.ConclusionFor medial mobile-bearing UKA, slight to moderate degenerative changes in the PFJ, except lateral facet, did not compromise PROMs or revision rates. For medial fixed-bearing UKA, although it might not be conclusive enough, PROMs or revision rates were not adversely affected by PFJ degeneration (regardless of the facet).

Dataset Information

Survival of medial versus lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis.

Publications

Survival of medial versus lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets