Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Aug 1;3(8):442-448.
doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170060. eCollection 2018 Aug.

Update on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Current indications and failure modes

Michele Vasso  1 , Alexander Antoniadis  2 , Naeder Helmy  2
Affiliations

Update on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Current indications and failure modes

Michele Vasso et al. EFORT Open Rev. .

Abstract

Despite the excellent success rates of modern implants, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) continues to show relatively high failure and revision rates, especially when compared with total knee arthroplasty (TKA).These higher rates of failure and revision are mainly observed during the early (< 5 years) post-operative period and are often due to incorrect indications and/or surgical errors.The correct clinical and radiological indications for UKA have therefore been analysed and correlated as far as possible with the principal mechanisms and timing of failures of UKA. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3:442-448. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170060.

Keywords: bearing dislocation; early failure; loosening; polyethylene; progression of osteoarthritis; revision; unexplained pain; unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

ICMJE Conflict of interest statement: M. Vasso declares a grant from the EFORT Foundation Visiting Fellowship, activity relating to the submitted work.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
An example showing that the tibial component has not been implanted in the optimal varus position.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
At three years after surgery, rapid progression of disease on the contralateral compartment is present.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Siman H, Kamath AF, Carrillo N, et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty vs total knee arthroplasty for medial compartment arthritis in patients older than 75 years: comparable reoperation, revision, and complication rates. J Arthroplasty 2017;32(6):1792-1797. - PubMed
    1. Koshino T, Sato K, Umemoto Y, et al. Clinical results of unicompartmental arthroplasty for knee osteoarthritis using a tibial component with screw fixation. Int Orthop 2015;39(6):1085-1091. - PubMed
    1. Vasso M, Del Regno C, Perisano C, et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is effective: ten year results. Int Orthop 2015;39(12):2341-2346. - PubMed
    1. Yoshida K, Tada M, Yoshida H, et al. Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in Japan—clinical results in greater than one thousand cases over ten years. J Arthroplasty 2013;28(9)(suppl):168-171. - PubMed
    1. Niinimäki TT, Murray DW, Partanen J, Pajala A, Leppilahti JI. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasties implanted for osteoarthritis with partial loss of joint space have high re-operation rates. Knee 2011;18(6):432-435. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources