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
. 2025 Apr 18;12(2):e70250.
doi: 10.1002/jeo2.70250. eCollection 2025 Apr.

Revision of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-Not as uncomplicated as one thought? Analysis of survival and re-revisions from a single centre

Sebastian Bockholt  1 , Georg Gosheger  1 , Burkhard Moellenbeck  1 , Kristian Nikolaus Schneider  1 , Jan Schwarze  1 , Christoph Theil  1
Affiliations

Revision of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-Not as uncomplicated as one thought? Analysis of survival and re-revisions from a single centre

Sebastian Bockholt et al. J Exp Orthop. .

Abstract

Purpose: Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a treatment option for medial knee osteoarthritis, with an increase in surgeries over the last few years. However, the results of revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) after a UKA vary greatly. The purpose of the study was to examine the survival after revision TKA of a failed UKA.

Methods: This is a retrospective single-centre analysis that includes 35 revision TKA procedures after the failed UKA performed from 2004 to 2019. The median follow-up after revision TKA was 39 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 32-52). The indication for revision of the UKA was aseptic loosening in 49% of patients (17/35). We evaluated demographic factors, reason for revision and revision implant used with descriptive statistics. Implant survival analysis with a focus on re-revision-free survival and potential re-revisions was performed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Differences in survival were analyzed using the log-rank test. p Value was set at 0.05.

Results: Forty per cent (14/35) of revision implants were posterior stabilized revision TKA, followed by 34% (12/35) of condylar constrained designs and 23% of rotating hinged TKA (8/35). Only one patient was revised to a cruciate retaining primary implant (3%). The re-revision-free survival after revision TKA amounted to 94% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91%-100%) after 1 year, 80% (95% CI: 67%-93%) after 2 years and 74% (95% CI: 56%-90%) at 5 years. Twenty-three per cent of patients (8/35) underwent re-revision after the initial UKA revision after a median time period of 21 months (IQR: 12-24). The reasons for repeat revision were tibial aseptic loosening in 9% of patients (3/35), periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in 9% of patients (3/35) and instability in 5% (2/35). Rotating hinge knee implants showed reduced survivorship.

Conclusions: Revision of medial UKA is associated with an increased use of more elaborate and complex revision implants. There is a substantial risk of repeat revision, with aseptic tibial loosening and PJI being the main reasons for the failure of this series.

Level of evidence: Level III.

Keywords: TKA; UKA; revision TKA; total knee arthroplasty; unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Abdelaziz H, Jaramillo R, Gehrke T, Ohlmeier M, Citak M. Clinical survivorship of aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty using hinged knees and tantalum cones at minimum 10‐year follow‐up. J Arthroplasty. 2019;34:3018–3022. - PubMed
    1. Burnett RSJ, Nair R, Hall CA, Jacks DA, Pugh L, McAllister MM. Results of the Oxford Phase 3 mobile bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty from an independent center: 467 knees at a mean 6‐year follow‐up: analysis of predictors of failure. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29:193–200. - PubMed
    1. Chou DTS, Swamy GN, Lewis JR, Badhe NP. Revision of failed unicompartmental knee replacement to total knee replacement. Knee. 2012;19:356–359. - PubMed
    1. Cross MB, Yi PY, Moric M, Sporer SM, Berger RA, Della Valle CJ. Revising an HTO or UKA to TKA: is it more like a primary TKA or a revision TKA? J Arthroplasty. 2014;29:229–231. - PubMed
    1. Dyrhovden GS, Lygre SHL, Badawy M, Gøthesen Ø, Furnes O. Have the causes of revision for total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasties changed during the past two decades? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475:1874–1886. - PMC - PubMed