MID-TERM EFFECTIVENESS OF OXFORD UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE SYSTEM PHASE III FOR MEDIAL UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS_Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

Authors：

TANG Hengtao , ZHAO Liang , YAN Hua , JIN Dadi , SU Xuntong.

Department of Orthopedics, the Third Hospital Affiliated to Nanfang Medical University, Guangzhou Guangdong, 510630, P.R.China.;

Corresponding author：

Keywords：

Medial unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis，Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty ，Oxford Unicompartmental Knee system Phase III， Mid-term effectiveness

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the mid-term effectiveness of Oxford Unicompartmental Knee system Phase III for medial unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (OA). Methods Between December 2008 and August 2010, 26 patients (32 knees) with medial unicompartmental knee OA were treated. Of 26 patients, 11 were followed up more than 2 years, including 7 males and 4 females (14 knees, 6 left and 8 right knees) with an average age of 62.4 years (range, 50-74 years). All patients had load suffering and tenderness of medial unicompartmental knee, and complicated by varus deformity without limitation of flexion and extension; the disease duration ranged 5-23 years (mean, 11.6 years). According to Ahlback staging, 4 knees were at stage II and 10 knees at stage III. Cemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (Oxford Unicompartmental Knee system Phase III) was performed by minimally invasive technique. Results All the incisions were primary healing after operation. Five cases suffered from local ache in the pes anserinus during the first 3 months after operation, which was cured after conservative therapy. Of them, 11 patients were followed up 27.5 months on average (range, 24-30 months). During follow-up, no complication of prosthesis loosening, displacement, arthropathy in the opposite department, or the patellofemoral joint occurred. The range of motion was significantly improved from (109.2 ± 8.7)° preoperatively to (123.5 ± 6.7)° at last follow-up (P lt; 0.05); knee society score (KSS) and Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores were all significantly improved (P lt; 0.05). At last follow-up, the femoro-tibial angle was significantly improved (P lt; 0.05); tibial plateau and the tibial anatomical axis increased, showing no significant difference (P gt; 0.05); and posterior tibial slope was significantly decreased (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion Oxford Unicompartmental Knee system Phase III has satisfactory mid-term effectiveness in treating medial unicompartmental knee OA with the advantages of little trauma and rapid recovery, but long-term effectiveness is expected for further follow-up.

Citation： TANG Hengtao,ZHAO Liang,YAN Hua,JIN Dadi,SU Xuntong.. MID-TERM EFFECTIVENESS OF OXFORD UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE SYSTEM PHASE III FOR MEDIAL UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 2012, 26(1): 17-20. doi: Copy

1.	unicompartimental knee arhroplasty: a long term follow-up study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2009, 95(1): 12-21.
2.	Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2009, 129(4): 463-468.
3.	arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2002, 84-A(11): 1977-1981.
4.	knee replacement: retrospective clinical and radiographic evaluation.
5.	of 83 patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2010, 18(6): 710-717.
6.	A one to nine-year retrieval analysis of the Oxford knee. J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 1992, 74(2): 228-232.
7.	technique through a mini-incision. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2007, (464): 32-36.
8.	knee arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2005, 87(5): 999-1006.
9.	trail. J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 2009, 91(1): 52-57.
10.	past, present, and future. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ), 2009, 38(1): 17-23.
11.	knee arthroplasty: survivorship and technical considerations.
12.	at an average follow-up of 12.4 years. J Arthroplasty, 2006, 21(1): 13-17.
13.	Lustig S, Paillot JL, Servien E, et al. Cemented all polyethylene tibial insert.
14.	Naal FD, Neuerburg C, Salzmalm GM, et al. Association of body mass index and clinical outcome 2 years after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
15.	Mont MA, Haas S, Mullick T, et al. Total knee arthroplasty for patellofemoral.
16.	蒋协远, 王大伟. 骨科临床疗效评价标准. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2005: 275-277.
17.	Bruni D, Iacono F, Russo A, et al. Minimally invasive unicompartmental.
18.	Argenson JN, O’Connor JJ. Polyethylene wear in meniscal knee replacement.
19.	Psychoyios V, Crawford RW, Murray DW, et al. Wear of congruent mensal bearings in unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 1998, 8(6): 976-982.
20.	Mounasamy V, Sambandam S. Surgical management of young arthritic knee: a review. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol, 2008, 18(8): 555-564.
21.	Scott RD, Cobb AG, McQueary FG, et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Eight- to 12-year follow-up evaluation with survivorship analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1991, (271): 96-100.
22.	Argenson JN, Parratte S, Flecher X, et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty:.
23.	Berger RA, Meneghini RM, Jacobs JJ, et al. Results of unicompartmental.
24.	Newman J, Pydisetty RV, Ackroyd C. Unicompartmental or total knee replacement: the 15-year results of a prospective randomized controlled.
25.	张催, 陈游, 张春雷, 等. 单髁置换术与全膝关节置换术治疗膝单间室骨性关节炎近中期疗效的对比研究. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2010, 4(2): 26-29.
26.	Jamali AA, Scott RD, Rubash HE, et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty:.
27.	Argenson JN, Chevrol-Benkeddache Y, Aubaniac JM. Modern uni-compartmental knee arthroplasty with cenmet: a three to ten year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2002, 84-A(2): 2235-2239.
28.	Pennington DW, Swienckowski JJ, Lutes WB, et al. Lateral unicompartmental.
29.	Mercier N, Wimsey S, Saragaglia D. Long-term clinical results of the Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop, 2010, 34(8): 1137-1143.
30.	高远鹏, 纪斌平, 贾俊青, 等. 单髁置换治疗膝关节骨性关节炎单间室病变. 中国现代医生, 2009, 47(16): 48-49.
31.	胡懿郃, 王贤, 廖前德, 等. 单髁膝关节置换治疗膝关节单间室病变. 中国矫形外科杂志, 2008, 16(3): 161-163.

1. unicompartimental knee arhroplasty: a long term follow-up study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2009, 95(1): 12-21.
2. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2009, 129(4): 463-468.
3. arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2002, 84-A(11): 1977-1981.
4. knee replacement: retrospective clinical and radiographic evaluation.
5. of 83 patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2010, 18(6): 710-717.
6. A one to nine-year retrieval analysis of the Oxford knee. J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 1992, 74(2): 228-232.
7. technique through a mini-incision. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2007, (464): 32-36.
8. knee arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2005, 87(5): 999-1006.
9. trail. J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 2009, 91(1): 52-57.
10. past, present, and future. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ), 2009, 38(1): 17-23.
11. knee arthroplasty: survivorship and technical considerations.
12. at an average follow-up of 12.4 years. J Arthroplasty, 2006, 21(1): 13-17.
13. Lustig S, Paillot JL, Servien E, et al. Cemented all polyethylene tibial insert.
14. Naal FD, Neuerburg C, Salzmalm GM, et al. Association of body mass index and clinical outcome 2 years after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
15. Mont MA, Haas S, Mullick T, et al. Total knee arthroplasty for patellofemoral.
16. 蒋协远, 王大伟. 骨科临床疗效评价标准. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2005: 275-277.
17. Bruni D, Iacono F, Russo A, et al. Minimally invasive unicompartmental.
18. Argenson JN, O’Connor JJ. Polyethylene wear in meniscal knee replacement.
19. Psychoyios V, Crawford RW, Murray DW, et al. Wear of congruent mensal bearings in unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 1998, 8(6): 976-982.
20. Mounasamy V, Sambandam S. Surgical management of young arthritic knee: a review. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol, 2008, 18(8): 555-564.
21. Scott RD, Cobb AG, McQueary FG, et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Eight- to 12-year follow-up evaluation with survivorship analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1991, (271): 96-100.
22. Argenson JN, Parratte S, Flecher X, et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty:.
23. Berger RA, Meneghini RM, Jacobs JJ, et al. Results of unicompartmental.
24. Newman J, Pydisetty RV, Ackroyd C. Unicompartmental or total knee replacement: the 15-year results of a prospective randomized controlled.
25. 张催, 陈游, 张春雷, 等. 单髁置换术与全膝关节置换术治疗膝单间室骨性关节炎近中期疗效的对比研究. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2010, 4(2): 26-29.
26. Jamali AA, Scott RD, Rubash HE, et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty:.
27. Argenson JN, Chevrol-Benkeddache Y, Aubaniac JM. Modern uni-compartmental knee arthroplasty with cenmet: a three to ten year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2002, 84-A(2): 2235-2239.
28. Pennington DW, Swienckowski JJ, Lutes WB, et al. Lateral unicompartmental.
29. Mercier N, Wimsey S, Saragaglia D. Long-term clinical results of the Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop, 2010, 34(8): 1137-1143.
30. 高远鹏, 纪斌平, 贾俊青, 等. 单髁置换治疗膝关节骨性关节炎单间室病变. 中国现代医生, 2009, 47(16): 48-49.
31. 胡懿郃, 王贤, 廖前德, 等. 单髁膝关节置换治疗膝关节单间室病变. 中国矫形外科杂志, 2008, 16(3): 161-163.

Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

MID-TERM EFFECTIVENESS OF OXFORD UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE SYSTEM PHASE III FOR MEDIAL UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Format

Content