Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Orthopaedics
Published in: International Orthopaedics 5/2014

01-05-2014 | Original Paper

Common causes of failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a single-centre analysis of four hundred and seventy one cases

Authors: Mustafa Citak, Kathrin Dersch, Atul F. Kamath, Carl Haasper, Thorsten Gehrke, Daniel Kendoff

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 5/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

We performed this retrospective study to determine the main causes for early and late failures of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA).

Methods

Between January 2000 and March 2012, all patients treated for a failed medial UKA in the authors’ institution were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 471 patients were identified, and causes of failure were analysed based on the medical records and radiographs at the time of revision.

Results

The cohort included 161 males and 310 females, with a mean age of 67.7 years (range, 42–91 years; SD = 10.1) at the time of revision. The mean time from index arthroplasty to revision surgery was 6.1 years (range, 0.1–27.9 years; SD = 5.6). A total of 254 cases (53.9 %) failed within five years after primary implantation, and 108 cases (22.9 %) failed after ten years. The major reason for failure was the development of other compartment arthritis (39.5 %), followed by aseptic loosening (25.4 %).

Conclusions

Of importance, the mean time to failure after UKA was 6.1 years, with more than 50 % of failures occurring within the first five years postoperatively.
Literature
1.
Berger RA, Nedeff DD, Barden RM, Sheinkop MM, Jacobs JJ, Rosenberg AG, Galante JO (1999) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clinical experience at 6- to 10-year followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res 367:50–60PubMedCrossRef
2.
Ohdera T, Tokunaga J, Kobayashi A (2001) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for lateral gonarthrosis: midterm results. J Arthroplasty 16(2):196–200PubMedCrossRef
3.
Insall J, Aglietti P (1980) A five to seven-year follow-up of unicondylar arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 62(8):1329–1337PubMed
4.
Lindstrand A, Stenstrom A, Lewold S (1992) Multicenter study of unicompartmental knee revision. PCA, Marmor, and St Georg compared in 3,777 cases of arthrosis. Acta Orthop Scand 63(3):256–259PubMedCrossRef
5.
Berger RA, Meneghini RM, Jacobs JJ, Sheinkop MB, Della Valle CJ, Rosenberg AG, Galante JO (2005) Results of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years of follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(5):999–1006PubMedCrossRef
6.
Cartier P, Sanouiller JL, Grelsamer RP (1996) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty surgery. 10-year minimum follow-up period. J Arthroplasty 11(7):782–788PubMedCrossRef
7.
Foran JR, Brown NM, Della Valle CJ, Berger RA, Galante JO (2013) Long-term survivorship and failure modes of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(1):102–108PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
8.
Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ (1998) The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80(6):983–989PubMedCrossRef
9.
Svard UC, Price AJ (2001) Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A survival analysis of an independent series. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83(2):191–194PubMedCrossRef
10.
Manzotti A, Cerveri P, Pullen C, Confalonieri N (2013) Computer-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using dedicated software versus a conventional technique. Int Orthop. doi:10.​1007/​s00264-013-2215-8 PubMed
11.
Saragaglia D, Picard F, Refaie R (2012) Navigation of the tibial plateau alone appears to be sufficient in computer-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 36(12):2479–2483PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
12.
Buckup K, Linke LC, Hahne V (2007) Minimally invasive implantation and computer navigation for a unicondylar knee system. Orthopedics 30(8 Suppl):66–69PubMed
13.
Molfetta L, Caldo D (2008) Computer navigation versus conventional implantation for varus knee total arthroplasty: a case-control study at 5 years follow-up. Knee 15(2):75–79PubMedCrossRef
14.
Epinette JA, Brunschweiler B, Mertl P, Mole D, Cazenave A (2012) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty modes of failure: wear is not the main reason for failure: a multicentre study of 418 failed knees. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 98(6 Suppl):S124–S130PubMedCrossRef
15.
Saragaglia D, Bonnin M, Dejour D, Deschamps G, Chol C, Chabert B, Refaie R (2013) Results of a French multicentre retrospective experience with four hundred and eighteen failed unicondylar knee arthroplasties. Int Orthop 37(7):1273–1278PubMedCrossRef
16.
Sierra RJ, Kassel CA, Wetters NG, Berend KR, Della Valle CJ, Lombardi AV (2013) Revision of unicompartmental arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty: not always a slam dunk! J Arthroplasty 28(8 Suppl):128–132PubMedCrossRef
17.
Sundberg M, Lidgren L, Dahl A, Robertson O (2011) The Swedish knee arthroplasty register. Annual report 2011
18.
Tomkins A (2011) Australian Orthopaedic Association. National joint replacement registry. Annual report 2011
19.
Ewald FC (1989) The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:9–12PubMed
20.
Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2002) Patellar impingement following unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A(7):1132–1137PubMed
21.
Jarvenpaa J, Kettunen J, Miettinen H, Kroger H (2010) The clinical outcome of revision knee replacement after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus primary total knee arthroplasty: 8–17 years follow-up study of 49 patients. Int Orthop 34(5):649–653PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
22.
Mercier N, Wimsey S, Saragaglia D (2010) Long-term clinical results of the Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 34(8):1137–1143PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
23.
Newman J, Pydisetty RV, Ackroyd C (2009) Unicompartmental or total knee replacement: the 15-year results of a prospective randomised controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91(1):52–57PubMedCrossRef
24.
Saragaglia D, Estour G, Nemer C, Colle PE (2009) Revision of 33 unicompartmental knee prostheses using total knee arthroplasty: strategy and results. Int Orthop 33(4):969–974PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
25.
Steele RG, Hutabarat S, Evans RL, Ackroyd CE, Newman JH (2006) Survivorship of the St Georg Sled medial unicompartmental knee replacement beyond ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88(9):1164–1168PubMedCrossRef
26.
Berend KR, Lombardi AV Jr (2007) Liberal indications for minimally invasive oxford unicondylar arthroplasty provide rapid functional recovery and pain relief. Surg Technol Int 16:193–197PubMed
27.
Baker P, Jameson S, Critchley R, Reed M, Gregg P, Deehan D (2013) Center and surgeon volume influence the revision rate following unicondylar knee replacement: an analysis of 23,400 medial cemented unicondylar knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95(8):702–709PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Common causes of failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a single-centre analysis of four hundred and seventy one cases
Authors
Mustafa Citak
Kathrin Dersch
Atul F. Kamath
Carl Haasper
Thorsten Gehrke
Daniel Kendoff
Publication date
01-05-2014
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
International Orthopaedics / Issue 5/2014
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-013-2263-0

Other articles of this Issue 5/2014

International Orthopaedics 5/2014 Go to the issue

Original Paper

The effect of minimally displaced posterior malleolar fractures on decision making in minimally displaced lateral malleolus fractures

Original Paper

Multi-plate reconstruction for severe bicondylar tibial plateau fractures of young adults

ORTHOPAEDIC HERITAGE

Progress in musculoskeletal oncology from 1922 – 2012

Original Paper

Periprosthetic joint infection—effect on quality of life

Original Paper

Particulate cartilage under bioreactor-induced compression and shear

Original Paper

Clinical and radiological outcome of the Total Evolutive Shoulder System (TESS®) reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective comparative non-randomised study