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 ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 10/2021

01-10-2021 | KNEE

No difference in functional outcomes, quality of life and survivorship between metal-backed and all-polyethylene tibial components in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a 10-year follow-up study

Authors: Merrill Lee, Daryl Cheng, Jerry Chen, Lincoln Liow, Ngai Nung Lo, Seng Jin Yeo

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 10/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare functional outcomes, quality of life and survivorship at a minimum of 10 years postoperatively, between MB and AP tibial components in fixed-bearing UKAs.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study of 146 Query ID="Q3" Text="Author names: Please confirm if the author names are presented accurately and in the correct sequence (Lo Ngai Nung, Yeo Seng Jin). Also, kindly confirm the details in the metadata are correct." UKAs performed between 2004 and 2007 by a single fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeon was carried out. 27 UKAs received MB tibial components and 119 UKAs received AP tibial components. The cohort was followed up prospectively for 10 years. Functional outcomes were compared using the Knee Society Functional Score (KSFS), Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Quality of life measures were obtained from the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS), derived from the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36). Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:3 ratio of MB versus AP tibial components to account for possible confounding variables. Thereafter, outcomes between the two groups were compared. The proportion of patients who had attained the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the abovementioned scores was recorded as well.

Results

After propensity score matching, there were 28 UKAs with MB tibial components and 76 UKAs with AP tibial components. There was no significant difference between the two groups in functional outcomes (KSFS, KSKS and OKS), quality of life (PCS and MCS) and survivorship (92.3% vs 91.1%, respectively) at a minimum of 10 years postoperatively. However, a significantly higher proportion of patients in the group with AP tibial components attained the MCID for PCS at 10 years postoperatively, compared to those with MB tibial components (p = 0.031).

Conclusion

In conclusion, there were no significant differences in functional outcomes measures, quality of life and survivorship between MP and AP tibial components at a minimum of 10 years postoperatively.

Level of evidence

III.
Literature
1.
Bruni D, Gagliardi M, Akkawi I, Raspugli GF, Bignozzi S, Marko T, Bragonzoni L, Grassi A, Marcacci M (2016) Good survivorship of all-polyethylene tibial component UKA at long-term follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24:182–187CrossRef
2.
Clement ND, Bell A, Simpson P, Macpherson G, Patton JT, Hamilton DF (2020) Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty has a greater early functional outcome when compared to manual total knee arthroplasty for isolated medial compartment arthritis. Bone Joint Res 9:15–22CrossRef
3.
Clement ND, MacDonald D, Simpson AHRW (2014) The minimal clinically important difference in the Oxford knee score and Short Form 12 score after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:1933–1939CrossRef
4.
Escobar A, Quintana JM, Bilbao A, Aróstegui I, Lafuente I, Vidaurreta I (2007) Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartil 15:273–280CrossRef
5.
Farivar SS, Cunningham WE, Hays RD (2007) Correlated physical and mental health summary scores for the SF-36 and SF-12 Health Survey, vol 1. Health Qual Life Outcomes 5:3–10CrossRef
6.
Hutt JRB, Farhadnia P, Massé V, Lavigne M, Vendittoli PA (2015) A randomised trial of all-polyethylene and metal-backed tibial components in unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee. Bone Joint J 97-B:786–792CrossRef
7.
8.
Koh IJ, Suhl KH, Kim MW, Kim MS, Choi KY, In Y (2017) Use of all-polyethylene tibial components in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty increases the risk of early failure. J Knee Surg 30:807–815CrossRef
9.
Kozinn SC, Scott R (1989) Unicondylar knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 71:145–150CrossRef
10.
Laucis NC, Hays RD, Bhattacharyya T (2015) Scoring the SF-36 in orthopaedics: a brief guide. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:1628–1634CrossRef
11.
Lee M, Chen J, Shi LuC, Lo NN, Yeo SJ (2019) No differences in outcomes scores or survivorship of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty between patients younger or older than 55 years of age at minimum 10-year followup. Clin Orthop 477:1434–1446CrossRef
12.
Lee M, Huang Y, Chong HC, Ning Y, Lo NN, Yeo SJ (2016) Predicting satisfaction for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty patients in an Asian population. J Arthroplasty 31:1706–1710CrossRef
13.
Lee WC, Kwan YH, Chong HC, Yeo SJ (2017) The minimal clinically important difference for Knee Society Clinical Rating System after total knee arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:3354–3359CrossRef
14.
Lombardi AV, Berend KR, Walter CA, Aziz-Jacobo J, Cheney NA (2009) Is recovery faster for mobile-bearing unicompartmental than total knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop 467:1450–1457CrossRef
15.
Lustig S, Paillot JL, Servien E, Henry J, Ait Si Selmi T, Neyret P (2009) Cemented all polyethylene tibial insert unicompartimental knee arthroplasty: a long term follow-up study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 95:12–21CrossRef
16.
Mariani EM, Bourne MH, Jackson RT, Jackson ST, Jones P (2007) Early failure of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 22:81–84CrossRef
17.
Naal FD, Fischer M, Preuss A, Goldhahn J, von Knoch F, Preiss S, Munzinger U, Drobny T (2007) Return to sports and recreational activity after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Am J Sports Med 35:1688–1695CrossRef
18.
Nouta KA, Verra WC, Pijls BG, Schoones JW, Nelissen RGHH (2012) All-polyethylene tibial components are equal to metal-backed components: systematic review and meta-regression. Clin Orthop 470:3549–3559CrossRef
19.
Scott CEH, Eaton MJ, Nutton RW, Wade FA, Evans SL, Pankaj P (2017) Metal-backed versus all-polyethylene unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Proximal tibial strain in an experimentally validated finite element model. Bone Joint Res 6:22–30CrossRef
20.
Scott CEH, Eaton MJ, Nutton RW, Wade FA, Pankaj P, Evans SL (2013) Proximal tibial strain in medial unicompartmental knee replacements: A biomechanical study of implant design. Bone Joint J 95 B:1339–1347CrossRef
21.
Small SR, Berend ME, Ritter MA, Buckley CA, Rogge RD (2011) Metal backing significantly decreases tibial strains in a medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty model. J Arthroplasty 26:777–782CrossRef
22.
Vasso M, Corona K, D’Apolito R, Mazzitelli G, Panni AS (2017) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: modes of failure and conversion to total knee arthroplasty. Joints 5:44–50CrossRef
23.
Xu S, Lim W-AJ, Chen JY, Lo NN, Chia S-L, Tay DKJ, Hao Y, Yeo SJ (2019) The influence of obesity on clinical outcomes of fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 101-B:213–220CrossRef
24.
Zambianchi F, Digennaro V, Giorgini A, Grandi G, Fiacchi F, Mugnai R, Catani F (2015) Surgeon’s experience influences UKA survivorship: a comparative study between all-poly and metal back designs. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:2074–2080CrossRef
Metadata
Title
No difference in functional outcomes, quality of life and survivorship between metal-backed and all-polyethylene tibial components in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a 10-year follow-up study
Authors
Merrill Lee
Daryl Cheng
Jerry Chen
Lincoln Liow
Ngai Nung Lo
Seng Jin Yeo
Publication date
01-10-2021
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 10/2021
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06247-3

Other articles of this Issue 10/2021

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 10/2021 Go to the issue

KNEE

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty has higher revisions than total knee arthroplasty at long term follow-up: a registry study on 6453 prostheses

KNEE

Low rates of serious complications but high rates of hardware removal after high tibial osteotomy with Tomofix locking plate

KNEE

Total and unicondylar knee arthroplasty are equivalent treatment options in end-stage spontaneous osteonecrosis of the knee, and the size of the lesion has no influence on the results

KNEE

The effect of obesity on revision rate in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

KNEE

Increased contact area of flange and decreased wedge volume of osteotomy site by open wedge distal tibial tuberosity arc osteotomy compared to the conventional technique

KNEE

Robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: high survivorship and good patient-related outcomes at a minimum five years of follow-up