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
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 11/2013

01-11-2013 | Clinical Research

The Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Fails at a High Rate in a High-volume Knee Practice

Authors: William C. Schroer, MD, C. Lowry Barnes, MD, Paul Diesfeld, PA, Angela LeMarr, RN, Rachel Ingrassia, RN, Diane J. Morton, MS, Mary Reedy, RN

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 11/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The Oxford knee is a unicompartmental implant featuring a mobile-bearing polyethylene component with excellent long-term survivorship results reported by the implant developers and early adopters. By contrast, other studies have reported higher revision rates in large academic practices and in national registries. Registry data have shown increased failure with this implant especially by lower-volume surgeons and institutions.

Questions/purposes

In the setting of a high-volume knee arthroplasty practice, we sought to determine (1) the failure rate of the Oxford unicompartmental knee implant using a failure definition for aseptic loosening that combined clinical features, plain radiographs, and scintigraphy, and (2) whether increased experience with this implant would decrease failure rate, if there is a learning curve effect.

Methods

Eighty-three Oxford knee prostheses were implanted between September 2005 and July 2008 by the principal investigator. Radiographic and clinical data were available for review for all cases. A failed knee was defined as having recurrent pain after an earlier period of recovery from surgery, progressive radiolucent lines compared with initial postoperative radiographs, and a bone scan showing an isolated area of uptake limited to the area of the replaced compartment.

Results

Eleven knees in this series failed (13%); Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 86.5% (95% CI, 78.0%–95.0%) at 5 years. Failure occurrences were distributed evenly over the course of the study period. No learning curve effect was identified.

Conclusions

Based on these findings, including a high failure rate of the Oxford knee implant and the absence of any discernible learning curve effect, the principal investigator no longer uses this implant.

Level of Evidence

Level III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Literature
1.
Baker P, Jameson S, Critchley R, Gregg P, Deehan D. 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. 2013;95:702–709.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Berbari E, Mabry T, Tsaras G, Spangehl M, Erwin PJ, Murad MH, Steckelberg J, Osmon D. Inflammatory blood laboratory levels as markers of prosthetic joint infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92:2102–2109.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Berend KR, Lombardi AV Jr. Liberal indications for minimally invasive Oxford unicondylar arthroplasty provide rapid functional recovery and pain relief. Surg Technol Int. 2007;16:193–197.PubMed
4.
Chou DT, Swamy GN, Lewis JR, Badhe NP. Revision of failed unicompartmental knee replacement to total knee replacement. Knee. 2012;19:356–359.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Choy WS, Kim KJ, Lee SK, Yang DS, Lee NK. Mid-term results of Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg. 2011;3:178–183.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Dervin GF, Carruthers C, Freibel RJ, Gianchino AA, Kim PR, Thurston PR. Initial experience with the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26:192–197.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Ericsson KA, Krampe RT, Tesch-Romer C. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol Rev. 1993:100:363–406.CrossRef
8.
Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ, Murray DW. A critique of revision rate as an outcome measure: re-interpretation of knee joint registry data. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92:1628–1631.PubMed
9.
Gulati A, Chau R, Pandit HG, Gray H, Price AJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW. The incidence of physiological radiolucency following Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement and its relationship to outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91:896–902.PubMed
10.
Hamilton WG, Ammeen D, Engh CA Jr, Engh GA. Learning curve with minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:735–740.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Heller S, Fenichel I, Salai M, Luria T, Velkes S. The Oxford unicompartmental knee prosthesis for the treatment of medial compartment knee disease: 2 to 5 year follow-up. Isr Med Assoc J. 2009;11:266–268.PubMed
12.
Kalra S, Smith TO, Berko B, Walton NP. Assessment of radiolucent lines around the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement: sensitivity and specificity for loosening. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:777–781.PubMed
13.
Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc. 1958;53:457–481.CrossRef
14.
Kendrick BJ, Simpson DJ, Kapstein BL, Valstar ER, Gill HS, Murray DW, Price AJ. Polyethylene wear of mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement at 20 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:470–475.PubMed
15.
Kuipers BM, Kollen BJ, Bots PC, Burger BJ, Van Raay JJ, Tulp NJ, Verheyen CC. Factors associated with reduced early survival in the Oxford phase III medial unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee. 2010;17:48–52.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Lewold S, Goodman S, Knutson K, Robertson O, Lidgren L. Oxford meniscal bearing knee versus the Marmor knee in unicompartmental arthroplasty for arthrosis: a Swedish multicenter survival study. J Arthroplasty. 1995;10:722–731.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Mercier N, Wimsey S, Saragaglia D. Long-term clinical results of the Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2010;34:1137–1143.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ. The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:983–989.PubMedCrossRef
19.
20.
Pandit H, Jenkins C, Barker K, Dodd CA, Murray DW. The Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement using a minimally-invasive approach. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:54–60.
21.
Pearse AJ, Hooper GJ, Rothwell A, Frampton C. Survival and functional outcome after revision of a unicompartmental to a total knee replacement: the New Zealand National Joint Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92:508–512.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Price AJ, Svard U. A second decade lifetable survival analysis of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:174–179.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Rea P, Short A, Pandit H, Price AJ, Kyberd P, Beard DJ, Gill HS, Murray DW. Radiolucency and migration after Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2007;30(5 suppl):24–27.PubMed
24.
Robertsson O, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L. The routine of surgical management reduces failure after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83:45–49.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Schroer WC, Calvert GT, Diesfeld PJ, Reedy ME, LeMarr AR. Effects of increased surgical volume on total knee arthroplasty complications. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23(6 suppl 1):61–67.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Schroer WC, Stormont DM, Pietrzak WS. Seven-year survivorship and functional outcomes of the high-flexion Vanguard complete knee system. J Arthroplasty. 2013 May 20. pii: S0883-5403(13)00311-2 [Epub ahead of print].
27.
Vorlat P, Putzeys G, Cottenie D, Van Isacker T, Pouliart N, Handelberg F, Casteleyn PP, Gheysen F, Verdonk R. The Oxford unicompartmental knee prosthesis: an independent 10-year survival analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006;14:40–45.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Zermatten P, Munzinger U. The Oxford II medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: an independent 10-year survival study. Acta Orthop Belg. 2012;78:203–209.PubMed
Metadata
Title
The Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Fails at a High Rate in a High-volume Knee Practice
Authors
William C. Schroer, MD
C. Lowry Barnes, MD
Paul Diesfeld, PA
Angela LeMarr, RN
Rachel Ingrassia, RN
Diane J. Morton, MS
Mary Reedy, RN
Publication date
01-11-2013
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 11/2013
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-3174-5

Other articles of this Issue 11/2013

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 11/2013 Go to the issue

Clinical Research

Risk Factors for Significant Wound Complications Following Wide Resection of Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcomas

Case Reports

Case Reports: Treatment of Traumatic Triradiate Cartilage Epiphysiodesis: What is the Role of Bridge Resection?

CORR Curriculum - Orthopaedic Education

ACGME and ABOS Changes for the Orthopaedic Surgery PGY-1 (Intern) Year

Letter to the Editor

Letter to the Editor

Clinical Research

Have Levels of Evidence Improved the Quality of Orthopaedic Research?

Reply to the Letter to the Editor

Reply to the Letter to the Editor: Complications of Total Knee Arthroplasty: Standardized List and Definitions of The Knee Society