Five-year results of a randomised controlled trial comparing cemented and cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement using radiostereometric analysis
- PMID: 33408039
- DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2020.09.003
Five-year results of a randomised controlled trial comparing cemented and cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement using radiostereometric analysis
Abstract
Background: Cementless fixation is an alternative to cemented unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). The aim of this study was to determine if cementless UKR fixation is as good as cemented by comparing the five-year migration measured radiostereometric analysis (RSA) in a randomised controlled trial.
Methods: Thirty-nine patients were randomised to receive either a cemented or a cementless Oxford UKR and were studied at intervals up to five years to assess migration with RSA and radiolucencies with radiographs.
Results: During the first year there was a small and significant amount of migration, predominantly in an anterior direction, of both the cemented (0.24 mm, SD 0.32, p = 0.01) and cementless (0.26 mm, SD 0.31, p = 0.00) femoral components. Thereafter there was no significant migration in any direction. At no stage was there any significant difference between the migrations of the cemented or cementless femoral components. During the first year, particularly the first three months, the cementless tibial components subsided 0.28 mm (SD 0.19, p = 0.00). This was significantly (p = 0.00) greater than the subsidence of the cemented tibial component (0.09, SD 0.19, p = 0.28). Between the second and fifth years there was no significant migration of either cemented or cementless tibial components. At five years radiolucent lines occurred significantly less with cementless (one partial) compared to cemented (six partial and one complete) tibial components.
Conclusions: As, between two and five years, there was no significant migration of cemented or cementless components, and no significant difference between them, we conclude that cementless fixation is as reliable as cemented. It may be better as there are fewer radiolucent lines.
Keywords: Cementless fixation; Mobile bearing UKR; Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement; RSA; Radiostereometric analysis; Unicompartmental knee replacement.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that personal and institutional funding was received from Zimmer Biomet. Zimmer Biomet did not play any role in the study design, the collection, analysis and interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Similar articles
-
Cemented versus cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment of medial knee osteoarthritis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Sep;144(9):4391-4403. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05539-4. Epub 2024 Sep 19. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024. PMID: 39294529
-
Cemented versus cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using radiostereometric analysis: a randomised controlled trial.Bone Joint J. 2015 Feb;97-B(2):185-91. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.97B2.34331. Bone Joint J. 2015. PMID: 25628280 Clinical Trial.
-
Cementless Versus Cemented Tibial Fixation in Posterior Stabilized Total Knee Replacement: A Randomized Trial.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020 Jun 17;102(12):1075-1082. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.19.01010. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020. PMID: 32559052 Clinical Trial.
-
Five-year experience of cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement.Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017 Mar;25(3):694-702. doi: 10.1007/s00167-015-3879-y. Epub 2015 Nov 26. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017. PMID: 26611902
-
Cementless unicompartmental knee replacement achieves better ten-year clinical outcomes than cemented: a systematic review.Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021 Oct;29(10):3229-3245. doi: 10.1007/s00167-020-06091-5. Epub 2020 Jul 1. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021. PMID: 32613336
Cited by
-
Unicompartmental knee replacement: controversies and technical considerations.Arthroplasty. 2024 May 2;6(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s42836-024-00242-6. Arthroplasty. 2024. PMID: 38693586 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Hybrid Fixation Achieves Similar or Slightly Better Results Compared With All Cemented Fixation in Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty at the Short-Term Follow-Up.Cureus. 2025 Mar 31;17(3):e81533. doi: 10.7759/cureus.81533. eCollection 2025 Mar. Cureus. 2025. PMID: 40314040 Free PMC article.
-
Cemented versus cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment of medial knee osteoarthritis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Sep;144(9):4391-4403. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05539-4. Epub 2024 Sep 19. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024. PMID: 39294529
-
Comparison of cementless twin-peg, cemented twin-peg and cemented single-peg femoral component migration after medial unicompartmental knee replacement: a 5-year randomized RSA study.Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023 Dec;143(12):7169-7183. doi: 10.1007/s00402-023-04991-y. Epub 2023 Aug 11. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023. PMID: 37568057 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Painful Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Etiology, Diagnosis and Management.Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2024;12(8):546-557. doi: 10.22038/ABJS.2024.61787.3030. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2024. PMID: 39211572 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials