Cargando…
Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A review
Isolated lateral compartment osteoarthritis of the knee is a rare condition affecting approximately 1% of the population, which is ten times less common than osteoarthritis affecting only the medial compartment. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has many potential advantages over total knee a...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8082511/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33959483 http://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v12.i4.197 |
_version_ | 1783685857666924544 |
---|---|
author | Buzin, Scott D Geller, Jeffrey A Yoon, Richard S Macaulay, William |
author_facet | Buzin, Scott D Geller, Jeffrey A Yoon, Richard S Macaulay, William |
author_sort | Buzin, Scott D |
collection | PubMed |
description | Isolated lateral compartment osteoarthritis of the knee is a rare condition affecting approximately 1% of the population, which is ten times less common than osteoarthritis affecting only the medial compartment. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has many potential advantages over total knee arthroplasty. The benefits of UKA include a smaller incision, preservation of more native tissue (including cruciate ligaments and bone), decreased blood loss, and better overall proprioception. When UKA was first introduced in the 1970s, the outcomes of medial UKA (MUKA) were poor, but the few cases of lateral UKA (LUKA) showed promise. Since that time, there has been a relative paucity of literature focused specifically on LUKA given it is a rare procedure. Refinements in patient selection criteria, implant design, and surgical technique have been made leading to increased popularity. A review of the recent literature reveals that LUKA is associated with excellent long-term clinical outcomes and implant survivorship when performed in properly selected patients. Implant design options include fixed vs mobile bearing as well as metal backed vs all polyethylene tibial component, with improved outcomes noted with fixed bearing designs. Three reasons cited for revision (i.e., fracture of the femoral component, fracture of the tibial component, and valgus malalignment) had been reported in past literature but not recently. Presently, while rare, the most common cause of failure and need for revision are osteoarthritis progression and aseptic loosening. Despite the need for an occasional revision procedure, the survivorship of LUKA is comparable to MUKA, although it should be noted that outcomes of MUKA have been notably varied. Continued pursuit of improved techniques and implant designs will continue to show LUKA to be an excellent procedure for appropriately indicated patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8082511 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Baishideng Publishing Group Inc |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80825112021-05-05 Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A review Buzin, Scott D Geller, Jeffrey A Yoon, Richard S Macaulay, William World J Orthop Minireviews Isolated lateral compartment osteoarthritis of the knee is a rare condition affecting approximately 1% of the population, which is ten times less common than osteoarthritis affecting only the medial compartment. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has many potential advantages over total knee arthroplasty. The benefits of UKA include a smaller incision, preservation of more native tissue (including cruciate ligaments and bone), decreased blood loss, and better overall proprioception. When UKA was first introduced in the 1970s, the outcomes of medial UKA (MUKA) were poor, but the few cases of lateral UKA (LUKA) showed promise. Since that time, there has been a relative paucity of literature focused specifically on LUKA given it is a rare procedure. Refinements in patient selection criteria, implant design, and surgical technique have been made leading to increased popularity. A review of the recent literature reveals that LUKA is associated with excellent long-term clinical outcomes and implant survivorship when performed in properly selected patients. Implant design options include fixed vs mobile bearing as well as metal backed vs all polyethylene tibial component, with improved outcomes noted with fixed bearing designs. Three reasons cited for revision (i.e., fracture of the femoral component, fracture of the tibial component, and valgus malalignment) had been reported in past literature but not recently. Presently, while rare, the most common cause of failure and need for revision are osteoarthritis progression and aseptic loosening. Despite the need for an occasional revision procedure, the survivorship of LUKA is comparable to MUKA, although it should be noted that outcomes of MUKA have been notably varied. Continued pursuit of improved techniques and implant designs will continue to show LUKA to be an excellent procedure for appropriately indicated patients. Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2021-04-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8082511/ /pubmed/33959483 http://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v12.i4.197 Text en ©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. |
spellingShingle | Minireviews Buzin, Scott D Geller, Jeffrey A Yoon, Richard S Macaulay, William Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A review |
title | Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A review |
title_full | Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A review |
title_fullStr | Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A review |
title_full_unstemmed | Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A review |
title_short | Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A review |
title_sort | lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a review |
topic | Minireviews |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8082511/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33959483 http://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v12.i4.197 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT buzinscottd lateralunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyareview AT gellerjeffreya lateralunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyareview AT yoonrichards lateralunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyareview AT macaulaywilliam lateralunicompartmentalkneearthroplastyareview |