Top

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Systematic review

Bearing dislocation of mobile bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in East Asian countries: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Authors: Xiaowei Sun, Pei Liu, Feifan Lu, Weiguo Wang, Wanshou Guo, Qidong Zhang

Published in: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Background

Bearing dislocation is a common postoperative complication of mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, and East Asian patients tend to be at higher risk. However, whether this high dislocation rate is common in all East Asian populations remains unclear. This meta-analysis was performed to explore this issue and describe various features of dislocation in East Asians, including the onset time, dislocation direction, and re-dislocation rate.

Methods

The literature was searched in PubMed, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane Library up to May 2020. Studies were scrutinized by two independent authors, and the bearing dislocation rate, onset time, direction, and re-dislocation rate were specifically analyzed. RevMan 5.3 was used for the statistical analysis.

Results

Seven case series from Korea, China, and Japan were included. The pooled analysis showed that the total dislocation rate was 2.37%, while the subgroup analysis showed that the dislocation rate in Korea and other countries was 4.50% and 0.74%, respectively (P < 0.01). Another subgroup analysis of the onset time showed a significant difference before and after the first 5 years postoperatively (P < 0.01). Anterior and posterior dislocations were more frequent than medial and lateral dislocations (P < 0.01). The average re-dislocation rate was 32.45%, which was approximately seven times higher than the primary dislocation rate (P < 0.01).

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis demonstrated that Korea had a higher bearing dislocation rate among East Asian countries, especially in the first 5 years after primary UKA. Anterior and posterior dislocations were common. The most important finding is that the re-dislocation rate can be much higher than the initial dislocation rate.

Kim SJ, Postigo R, Koo S, Kim JH. Causes of revision following Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(8):1895–901. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2644-3.CrossRefPubMed

van der List JP, Zuiderbaan HA, Pearle AD. Why do medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasties fail today? J Arthroplast. 2016;31(5):1016–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2015.11.030.CrossRef

Hansen EN, Ong KL, Lau E, Kurtz SM, Lonner JH. Unicondylar knee arthroplasty has fewer complications but higher revision rates than total knee arthroplasty in a study of large United States Databases. J Arthroplast. 2019;34(8):1617–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.04.004.CrossRef

Ro KH, Heo JW, Lee DH. Bearing dislocation and progression of osteoarthritis after mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty vary between Asian and Western patients: a meta-analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018;476(5):946–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999.0000000000000205.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bae JH, Kim JG, Lee SY, et al. Epidemiology of bearing dislocations after mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: multicenter analysis of 67 bearing dislocations. Article J Arthrop. 2020;35(1):265–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.08.004.CrossRef

Kang SW, Kim KT, Hwang YS, Park WR, Shin JK, Song MH. Is mobile-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty appropriate for Asian patients with the risk of bearing dislocation? J Arthroplasty. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.12.036 Article in Press.

Tian S, Liu J, Yuan W, et al. Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee replacement: midterm clinical outcome. PLoS One. 2017;12(5):e0176082. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176082.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Xue H, Tu Y, Ma T, Wen T, Yang T, Cai M. Up to twelve year follow-up of the Oxford phase three unicompartmental knee replacement in China: seven hundred and eight knees from an independent centre. Int Orthop. 2017;41(8):1571–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3492-4.CrossRefPubMed

Yoshida K, Tada M, Yoshida H, Takei S, Fukuoka S, Nakamura H. Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in Japan--clinical results in greater than one thousand cases over ten years. J Arthroplast. 2013;28(9 Suppl):168–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2013.08.019.CrossRef

10.

Mohammad HR, Strickland L, Hamilton TW, Murray DW. Long-term outcomes of over 8,000 medial Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knees-a systematic review. Acta Orthop. 2018;89(1):101–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2017.1367577.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Choy WS, Lee KW, Kim HY, Kim KJ, Chun YS, Yang DS. Mobile bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients whose lifestyles involve high degrees of knee flexion: a 10-14 year follow-up study. Knee. 2017;24(4):829–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2017.05.004.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Khanna A, Gougoulias N, Longo UG, Maffulli N. Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review. Orthop Clin North Am. 2009;40(4):479–89, viii. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2009.05.003.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Kim KT, Lee S, Lee JI, Kim JW. Analysis and treatment of complications after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2016;28(1):46–54. https://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.2016.28.1.46.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg. 2003;73(9):712–6. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1445-2197.2003.02748.x.CrossRef

15.

Campi S, Pandit HG, Dodd CAF, Murray DW. Cementless fixation in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017;25(3):736–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4244-5.CrossRef

16.

Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2003;327(7414):557–60. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557.CrossRef

17.

Ji JH, Park SE, Song IS, Kang H, Ha JY, Jeong JJ. Complications of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg. 2014;6(4):365–72. https://doi.org/10.4055/cios.2014.6.4.365.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Lim HC, Bae JH, Song SH, Kim SJ. Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement in Korean patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br Vol. 2012;94(8):1071–6. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.94b8.29372.CrossRef

19.

Koh IJ, Kim JH, Jang SW, Kim MS, Kim C, In Y. Are the Oxford((R)) medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty new instruments reducing the bearing dislocation risk while improving components relationships? A case control study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2016;102(2):183–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2015.11.015.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Lee SY, Bae JH, Kim JG, et al. The influence of surgical factors on dislocation of the meniscal bearing after Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement: a case-control study. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-b(7):914–22. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.96b7.33352.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Pandit H, Hamilton TW, Jenkins C, Mellon SJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW. The clinical outcome of minimally invasive Phase 3 Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a 15-year follow-up of 1000 UKAs. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-b(11):1493–500. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.97b11.35634.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Kim SG, Kim HG, Lee SY, Lim HC, Bae JH. Redislocation after bearing exchange for the treatment of mobile bearing dislocation in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Rel Res. 2018;30(3):234–40. https://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.17.085.CrossRef

23.

Asma A, Erduran M, Eymir M. An unusual presentation of insert dislocation and MCL rupture in unicompartmental knee replacement with 2 years postoperative results: does it functional? Case Rep Orthop. 2019;2019:2634738. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/2634738.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Kawaguchi K, Inui H, Taketomi S, et al. Meniscal bearing dislocation while rolling over in sleep following Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2019;26(1):267–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2018.10.015.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Kamenaga T, Hiranaka T, Takayama K, Tsubosaka M, Kuroda R, Matsumoto T. Adequate positioning of the tibial component is key to avoiding bearing impingement in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2019;34(11):2606–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.05.054.CrossRef

26.

Kamenaga T, Hiranaka T, Hida Y, Fujishiro T, Okamoto K. Rotational position of the tibial component can decrease bony coverage of the tibial component in Oxford mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2019;26(2):459–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2019.01.003.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Bozkurt M, Akmese R, Cay N, et al. Cam impingement of the posterior femoral condyle in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(11):2495–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2301-2.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Lombardi AV Jr, Kolich MT, Berend KR, Morris MJ, Crawford DA, Adams JB. Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty: is it as good as a primary result? J Arthroplast. 2018;33(7S):S105–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.03.023.CrossRef

29.

Pandit H, Murray D, Dodd C. Failed unicompartmental knee replacement to total knee replacement conversion: can you achieve a primary outcome? Semin Arthroplast. 2015;26(2):68–72. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sart.2015.08.008.CrossRef

30.

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 Arthroplast. 2014;29(9 Suppl):229–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2014.03.053.CrossRef

Title: Bearing dislocation of mobile bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in East Asian countries: a systematic review with meta-analysis
Authors: Xiaowei Sun
Pei Liu
Feifan Lu
Weiguo Wang
Wanshou Guo
Qidong Zhang
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1749-799X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-02190-8

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Bearing dislocation of mobile bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in East Asian countries: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Is double-strut fibula ankle arthrodesis a reliable reconstruction for bone defect after distal tibia tumor resection?—a finite element study based on promising clinical outcomes

Polymethyl methacrylate cure time in simulated in vivo total knee arthroplasty versus in vitro conditions

Comparison of SDSG and CARDS classifications for L5/S1 lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: an independent inter- and intra-observer agreement study

Management of chronic knee pain caused by postsurgical or posttraumatic neuroma of the infrapatellar branch of the saphenous nerve

Long-term effects of cemented and cementless fixations of total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials

The effect of magnesium added to bupivacaine for arthroscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials