{"title":"Survivorship, clinical outcomes and indications for revision in uncemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: systematic review.","authors":"A Puvanendran, M Jaibaji, A Volpin, S Konan","doi":"10.52628/89.1.9873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Modern uncemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) relies on the mechanics of the implant design and a biological bond at the bone-implant interface to create a secure fixation of its components. The aim of this systematic review was to determine implant survivorship, clinical outcomes and indications for revision in uncemented UKAs. A search strategy was employed using keywords related to UKAs and uncemented fixation to identify suitable studies. Both prospective and retrospective studies with a minimum of two year mean follow-up were included. Data was gathered on study design, implant type, patient demographics, survivorship, clinical outcome scores and the indications for revision. Methodological quality was assessed using a ten-point risk of bias scoring tool. Eighteen studies were included in the final review. The mean follow-up of studies ranged between 2-11 years. The primary outcome of survival demonstrated 5 year survivorship ranged between 91.7-100.0% and 10-year survivorship between 91.0-97.5%. Clinical and functional outcome scores were found to be excellent in the majority of studies with the remaining reporting good results. Revisions represented 2.7% of the total operations performed. There were 145 revisions with an overall revision rate of 0.8 per 100 observed component years. Osteoarthritis disease progression (30.2%) and bearing dislocations (23.8%) were the most common causes of implant failure. This review finds uncemented UKAs demonstrate comparable survivorship, clinical outcomes and safety profile to cemented UKAs to consider this fixation a suitable alternative in clinical use.</p>","PeriodicalId":7018,"journal":{"name":"Acta orthopaedica Belgica","volume":"89 1","pages":"83-95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta orthopaedica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52628/89.1.9873","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Modern uncemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) relies on the mechanics of the implant design and a biological bond at the bone-implant interface to create a secure fixation of its components. The aim of this systematic review was to determine implant survivorship, clinical outcomes and indications for revision in uncemented UKAs. A search strategy was employed using keywords related to UKAs and uncemented fixation to identify suitable studies. Both prospective and retrospective studies with a minimum of two year mean follow-up were included. Data was gathered on study design, implant type, patient demographics, survivorship, clinical outcome scores and the indications for revision. Methodological quality was assessed using a ten-point risk of bias scoring tool. Eighteen studies were included in the final review. The mean follow-up of studies ranged between 2-11 years. The primary outcome of survival demonstrated 5 year survivorship ranged between 91.7-100.0% and 10-year survivorship between 91.0-97.5%. Clinical and functional outcome scores were found to be excellent in the majority of studies with the remaining reporting good results. Revisions represented 2.7% of the total operations performed. There were 145 revisions with an overall revision rate of 0.8 per 100 observed component years. Osteoarthritis disease progression (30.2%) and bearing dislocations (23.8%) were the most common causes of implant failure. This review finds uncemented UKAs demonstrate comparable survivorship, clinical outcomes and safety profile to cemented UKAs to consider this fixation a suitable alternative in clinical use.