medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2007, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2007; 21 (2)

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with an Oxford prosthesis

Palacios BF, Montes SF

Language: Spanish
References: 19
Page: 49-54
PDF size: 157.56 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction. Unicompartmental knee replacement is a procedure increasingly used in patients with osteoarthritis of the medial knee compartment. The purpose of this study is to report the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the “Oxford” prosthesis. Material and methods. This is a descriptive and cross-sectional study of 24 medial unicompartmental arthroplasties performed in 22 patients. Two cases were bilateral due to medial compartment arthrosis caused by genu varum with X-ray evidence of total loss of the medial joint space in the standing X-rays in ages 55 to 74 years. Fifteen females and 7 males were included. Ligament integrity was proven clinically and radiologically. A cemented Oxford prosthetic design was used (Biomet) with a minimally invasive medial approach. Results. A clinical and radiological evaluation of all patients was performed in the immediate postoperative period, at 2 and 4 weeks and every 3 months thereafter. Pain, knee range of motion and gait autonomy were evaluated for a three-year period in the first 7 patients, and eight months in the last one. In 21 patients (95.4%) pain subsided completely and one has intermittent pain in the medial aspect of the operated knee; the flexion range achieved was 90° to 100° in 13 patients (59%) and 8 patients achieved more than 110°. Independent gait occurred at day 7 in 21 patients (95.4%); no complications were reported. Conclusion. Unicompartmental arthroplasty with the “Oxford” implant provides full pain relief in well selected patients. It is a reliable procedure with excellent functional outcomes, low morbidity, short hospital stay and rapid recovery.


REFERENCES

  1. Goodfellow J, O Connor J: The mechanics of the knee and prosthesis design. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1978; 60-B(3): 358-69.

  2. Goodfellow J, O Connor J: Kinematics of the knee and prosthesis design. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1977; 58-B: 247-58.

  3. Patil S, Colwell CW Jr, Ezzet KA, D’Lima DD: Can normal knee kinematics be restored with unicompartmental knee replacement? J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87(2): 332-8.

  4. Goodfellow J, O Connor J: Clinical results of the Oxford Knee. Surface arthroplasty of the tibiofemoral joint with a meniscal bearing prosthesis. Clin Orthph Relat Res 1986; (205): 21-42.

  5. Carr A, Keyes G, Miller R, O’Connor J, Goodfellow J: Medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. A survival study of the Oxford meniscal knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993; (295): 205-13.

  6. White SH, Ludkowski PF, Goodfellow JW: Anteromedial osteoarthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1991; 73(4): 582-6.

  7. Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ: The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998; 80(6): 983-9.

  8. Goodfellow J, O Connor J: The anterior cruciate ligament in knee arthroplasty. A risk-factor with unconstrained meniscal prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992; (276): 245-52.

  9. Berger RA, Nedeff DD, Barden RM, Sheinkop MM, Jacobs JJ, Rosenber AG, Galante JO: Unicompartmental Knee arthroplasty. Clinical experience at 6-to 10-years follow up. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1999; (367): 50-60.

  10. Callaghan JJ, Insall JN, Greenwald AS, Dennis DA, Komistek RD, Murray DW, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, Dorr LD: Mobile-bearing knee replacement: concepts and results. Instr Course Lect 2001; 50: 431-49.

  11. Pennington DW, Swienckowski JJ, Lutes WB, Drake GN: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients sixty years of age or younger. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85-A(1)0: 1968-74.

  12. Murray DW: Unicompartmental Knee replacement now or never? Orthopaedics 2000; 23(9): 979-80.

  13. 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(1): 54-60.

  14. Argenson JN, Chevrol-Benkeddache Y, Aubaniac JM: Modern unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with cement: a three to ten-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002; 84-A(12): 2235-9.

  15. Squire MW, Callaghan JJ, Goetz DD, Sullivan PM, Johnson RC: Unicompartamental knee replacement: A minimum 15 years follow up study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1999; (367): 61-72.

  16. Lewold S, Goodman S, Knutson K, Robertsson 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(6): 722-31.

  17. Levine WN, Ozuna RM, Scott RD, Thornhill TS: Conversion of failed modern unicompartmental arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1996; 11(7): 797-801.

  18. Padgett DE, Stern SH, Insall JN: Revision total knee arthroplasty for failed unicompartmental replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1991; 73(2): 186-90.

  19. Webb JM, Topf H, Haikel S, Dodd CA, Goodfellow JW, Murray DW: Minimally invasive Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1999; 81-B: 295.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com