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
. 2020 May 14;9(5):1476.
doi: 10.3390/jcm9051476.

Cementless Oxford Medial Unicompartmental Knee Replacement-Clinical and Radiological Results of 228 Knees with a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up

Benjamin Panzram  1 , Mira Mandery  1 , Tobias Reiner  1 , Tobias Gotterbarm  1 , Marcus Schiltenwolf  1 , Christian Merle  1
Affiliations

Cementless Oxford Medial Unicompartmental Knee Replacement-Clinical and Radiological Results of 228 Knees with a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up

Benjamin Panzram et al. J Clin Med. .

Abstract

(1) Background: Studies show several advantages of unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) over total knee replacements (TKR), whereas registry based revision rates of UKR are significantly higher than for TKA. Registry data report lower revision rates for cementless UKR compared to cemented UKR. The aim of this study was to assess clinical and radiological results of cementless Oxford UKR (OUKR) in an independent cohort. (2) Methods: This retrospective cohort study examines a consecutive series of 228 cementless OUKR. Clinical outcome was measured using functional scores (Oxford Knee Score (OKS), American Knee Society Score (AKSS), Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire for Osteoarthritis (FFbH-OA), range of motion (ROM)), pain and satisfaction. Radiographs were analyzed regarding the incidence of radiolucent lines (RL), implant positioning, and their possible impact on clinical outcome. (3) Results: At a mean follow-up of 37.1 months, the two and three year revision free survival-rates were 97.5% and 96.9%. Reasons for revision surgery were progression of osteoarthritis, inlay dislocation and pain. All clinical outcome scores showed a significant improvement from pre- to postoperative. The incidence of RL around the implant was highest within the first year postoperatively (36%), and decreased (5%) within the second year. Their presence was not correlated with inferior clinical outcome. Implant positioning showed no influence on clinical outcome. (4) Conclusion: Cementless OUKR showed excellent clinical outcome and survival rates, with reliable osteointegration. Neither the incidence of radiolucent lines nor implant positioning were associated with inferior clinical outcome.

Keywords: OUKR; Oxford medial; cementless UKR; cementless fixation; radiolucencies; radiolucent lines.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Author B.P. reports research funding from Zimmer Biomet, outside the submitted work. Authors M.M., T.R. and M.S. have no conflicts of interests to declare. Authors C.M. and T.G. report research funding and paid lectures from Zimmer Biomet outside the submitted work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Zones of radiolucent lines (A)—femoral, (B)—tibial.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Implant positioning: A—femoral flexion (15° flexion, 0° extension tolerated), B—tibial slope: 97° standard value (±5° tolerated) C—femoral varus–valgus: 0° standard value (±10° tolerated) D—tibial varus–valgus: 90° standard value (±5° tolerated).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Overview of patient collective.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Kaplan–Meier curve: endpoint implant revision .
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Green M., Howard P., Porter M., Wilkinson M., Wishart N., National Joint Registry for England Wales Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: 14th Annual Report 2017. [(accessed on 17 July 2018)]; Available online: http://www.njrreports.org.uk/Portals/0/PDFdownloads/NJR%2014th%20Annual%....
    1. Liddle A.D., Judge A., Pandit H., Murray D.W. Adverse outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee replacement in 101,330 matched patients: A study of data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Lancet. 2014;384:1437–1445. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60419-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lombardi A.V., Jr., Berend K.R., Walter C.A., Aziz-Jacobo J., Cheney N.A. Is recovery faster for mobile-bearing unicompartmental than total knee arthroplasty? Clin. Orthop. 2009;467:1450–1457. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-0731-z. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Burn E., Liddle A.D., Hamilton T.W., Pai S., Pandit H.G., Murray D.W., Pinedo-Villanueva R. Choosing Between Unicompartmental and Total Knee Replacement: What Can Economic Evaluations Tell us? A Systematic Review. Pharm. Open. 2017 doi: 10.1007/s41669-017-0017-4. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. The New Zealand Orthopaedic Association The New Zealand Joint Registry―Nineteen Year Report January 1999 to December 2017, 2018. [(accessed on 26 April 2019)]; Available online: https://nzoa.org.nz/system/files/DH8152_NZJR_2018_Report_v6_4Decv18.pdf.

LinkOut - more resources