Patient Satisfaction Following Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Current Concepts.

IF 2.7 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Roderick J M Vossen, Gaby V Ten Noever de Brauw, Tarik Bayoumi, Hendrik A Zuiderbaan, Andrew D Pearle
{"title":"Patient Satisfaction Following Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Current Concepts.","authors":"Roderick J M Vossen, Gaby V Ten Noever de Brauw, Tarik Bayoumi, Hendrik A Zuiderbaan, Andrew D Pearle","doi":"10.1016/j.jisako.2024.100349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has gained progressive popularity in recent decades, currently comprising approximately 10% of knee arthroplasties in the United States. Nonetheless, UKA has not yet solidified its position as the superior treatment for isolated compartment osteoarthritis, as initial reported implant survivorship was subpar, leading to hesitation in its utilization and stricter patient indications compared to total knee arthroplasty. Patient satisfaction following knee arthroplasty has emerged as a critical metric to gauge patient acceptance and contentment with surgical interventions. Currently, a variety of UKA types exist, differing in bearing design, fixation techniques such as cementless or cemented fixation, and robotic-assisted systems, each with its own merits and drawbacks. Multiple studies have demonstrated the contributions of these innovations to improve clinical outcomes and implant survivorship. However, the abundance of studies has made it challenging to establish a clear overview. This paper provides an overview of the current concepts of UKA, evaluating various aspects of UKA referencing to patient satisfaction and providing a recap of its historical development. Available research demonstrated no significantly universal superior variant of UKA.</p>","PeriodicalId":36847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of ISAKOS Joint Disorders & Orthopaedic Sports Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of ISAKOS Joint Disorders & Orthopaedic Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jisako.2024.100349","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has gained progressive popularity in recent decades, currently comprising approximately 10% of knee arthroplasties in the United States. Nonetheless, UKA has not yet solidified its position as the superior treatment for isolated compartment osteoarthritis, as initial reported implant survivorship was subpar, leading to hesitation in its utilization and stricter patient indications compared to total knee arthroplasty. Patient satisfaction following knee arthroplasty has emerged as a critical metric to gauge patient acceptance and contentment with surgical interventions. Currently, a variety of UKA types exist, differing in bearing design, fixation techniques such as cementless or cemented fixation, and robotic-assisted systems, each with its own merits and drawbacks. Multiple studies have demonstrated the contributions of these innovations to improve clinical outcomes and implant survivorship. However, the abundance of studies has made it challenging to establish a clear overview. This paper provides an overview of the current concepts of UKA, evaluating various aspects of UKA referencing to patient satisfaction and providing a recap of its historical development. Available research demonstrated no significantly universal superior variant of UKA.

单间室膝关节置换术后的患者满意度:当前概念。
近几十年来,单腔膝关节置换术(UKA)逐渐普及,目前约占美国膝关节置换术的 10%。然而,由于最初报道的植入物存活率并不理想,UKA 还没有巩固其作为治疗孤立隔室骨关节炎的优越疗法的地位,导致人们对其使用犹豫不决,而且与全膝关节置换术相比,UKA 的患者适应症更为严格。膝关节置换术后的患者满意度已成为衡量患者对手术干预的接受度和满意度的重要指标。目前,UKA 有多种类型,轴承设计、固定技术(如无骨水泥或骨水泥固定)和机器人辅助系统各不相同,各有优缺点。多项研究表明,这些创新技术有助于提高临床疗效和植入物存活率。然而,大量的研究使得建立一个清晰的概述具有挑战性。本文概述了 UKA 的当前概念,从患者满意度的角度评估了 UKA 的各个方面,并回顾了其历史发展。现有研究表明,UKA 没有明显的通用优越变体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
61
审稿时长
108 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信