Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association (대한정형외과학회지)

Korean Orthopaedic Association (대한정형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Mid-Term Results of Fixed Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up

고정형 슬관절 단일 구획 치환술의 중기 추시 결과: 최소 5년 추시

  • Oh, Jeong Han (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, HeeMyoung Hospital) ;
  • Joo, Il-Han (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hanyang University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kong, Dong-Yi (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hanyang University College of Medicine) ;
  • Choi, Choong-Hyeok (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hanyang University College of Medicine)
  • 오정한 (희명병원 정형외과) ;
  • 주일한 (한양대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 공동의 (한양대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 최충혁 (한양대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실)
  • Received : 2017.09.28
  • Accepted : 2017.12.12
  • Published : 2018.12.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes, and the complications of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) using a fixed bearing prosthesis after 5-year follow-up. Materials and Methods: Twenty-six knees (25 patients) that underwent fixed bearing UKA between May 2003 and August 2011 were included. The subjects were 3 males (3 knees) and 22 females (23 knees), and the average age was 63.5 years. The preoperative diagnosis was osteoarthritis (23 knees) and osteonecrosis (3 knees). The mean follow-up duration was 67 months (from 60 to 149 months). The clinical evaluation included pre- and postoperative American knee society knee and function score, and range of motion. The radiology evaluation included standing antero-posterior, lateral view, and fluoroscopic film to analyze the postoperative alignment and osteolysis. Results: The mean American Knee Society knee score and function score were improved from 42.0 and 57.5 to 87.9 and 85.0, respectively (p<0.001). The mean preoperative and postoperative range of motion was $132.9^{\circ}$ and $132.5^{\circ}$, respectively. The mean femorotibial angle were varus $0.5^{\circ}$ preoperatively and valgus $2.2^{\circ}$ postoperatively. A radiolucent line was observed in 2 knees; one knee had a stable implant, while in the other knee, patellofemoral arthritis was identified during UKA. Diffuse pain of the knee joint with tenderness of the medial joint line was identified at the follow-up, so conversion to total knee arthroplasty was recommended. No other complications, such as osteolysis, infections, postoperative stiffness, and dislocation, were encountered. Conclusion: The midterm results of fixed bearing UKA were clinically and radiologically satisfactory.

목적: 고정형 슬관절 단일 구획 치환술의 5년 추시 결과로 임상적 및 방사선적 결과, 합병증 발생 빈도를 알아보고자 하였다. 대상 및 방법: 2003년 5월부터 2011년 8월까지 고정형 슬관절 단일 구획 치환술을 시행한 25명, 26예를 대상으로 하였다. 평균 연령은 63.5세였으며 남자가 3명(3예), 여자가 22명(23예)이었으며 술 전 진단은 골관절염 23예, 골괴사 3예였다. 평균 추시기간은 평균 67개월(60-149개월)이었다. 임상적으로 술 전과 술 후의 미국슬관절학회 슬관절 점수 및 기능점수, 관절 운동 범위를 조사하였고, 방사선적으로 슬관절 기립 전후방 사진과 측면 사진, 투시기 촬영을 통하여 술 후의 정렬상태와 골용해 여부를 조사하였다. 결과: 임상적 결과로 슬관절 점수는 평균 42.0점에서 87.9점으로, 기능점수는 57.5점에서 85.0점으로 향상되었다(p<0.001). 술 전 관절 운동 범위는 평균 $132.9^{\circ}$에서 술 후 $132.5^{\circ}$로 큰 차이를 보이지 않았다. 방사선적 결과로 대퇴경골각은 술 전 평균 내반 $0.5^{\circ}$에서 술 후 외반 $2.2^{\circ}$로 측정되었다. 방사선 투과성 선(radiolucent line)이 관찰되는 경우가 2예 발견되었으며 그 중 1예는 삽입물이 안정적이었으나 다른 1예는 단일 구획 치환술 시 대퇴슬개관절의 관절염을 확인하였고, 추시상 슬관절 내측 관절선의 동통 및 슬관절의 미만성 통증이 있어 슬관절 전치환술을 권유하였다. 그 외 골용해, 감염, 술 후 강직, 탈구 등의 합병증은 없었다. 결론: 고정형 슬관절 단일 구획 치환술의 중기 추시 결과는 임상적 및 방사선적으로 만족스러운 결과를 보였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Brown NM, Sheth NP, Davis K, et al. Total knee arthroplasty has higher postoperative morbidity than unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a multicenter analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27:S86-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2012.03.022
  2. Hopper GP, Leach WJ. Participation in sporting activities following knee replacement: total versus unicompartmental. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2008;16:973-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-008-0596-9
  3. Berger RA, Meneghini RM, Jacobs JJ, et al. Results of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years of follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:999-1006. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200505000-00010
  4. Price A, Waite J, Svard U. Long-term clinical results of the medial Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;435:171-80.
  5. Emerson Jr RH, Hansborough T, Reitman RD, Rosenfeldt W, Higgins LL. Comparison of a mobile with a fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee implant. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;404:62-70. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-200211000-00011
  6. Li MG, Yao F, Joss B, Ioppolo J, Nivbrant B, Wood D. Mobile vs. fixed bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a randomized study on short term clinical outcomes and knee kinematics. Knee. 2006;13:365-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2006.05.003
  7. Parratte S, Pauly V, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN. No longterm difference between fixed and mobile medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:61-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-1961-4
  8. Ko YB, Gujarathi MR, Oh KJ. Outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of comparative studies between fixed and mobile bearings focusing on complications. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2015;27:141-8. https://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.2015.27.3.141
  9. Gleeson RE, Evans R, Ackroyd CE, Webb J, Newman JH. Fixed or mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacement? A comparative cohort study. Knee. 2004;11:379-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2004.06.006
  10. Confalonieri N, Manzotti A, Pullen C. Comparison of a mobile with a fixed tibial bearing unicompartimental knee prosthesis: a prospective randomized trial using a dedicated outcome score. Knee. 2004;11:357-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2004.01.003
  11. Kim KT, Lee S, Kim JH, Hong SW, Jung WS, Shin WS. The survivorship and clinical results of minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at 10-year follow-up. Clin Orthop Surg. 2015;7:199-206. https://doi.org/10.4055/cios.2015.7.2.199
  12. Choy WS, Kim KJ, Lee SK, Yang DS, Lee NK. Mid-term results of oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg. 2011;3:178-83. https://doi.org/10.4055/cios.2011.3.3.178
  13. Peersman G, Stuyts B, Vandenlangenbergh T, Cartier P, Fennema P. Fixed- versus mobile-bearing UKA: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23:3296-305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3131-1
  14. Lisowski LA, van den Bekerom MP, Pilot P, van Dijk CN, Lisowski AE. Oxford Phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: medium-term results of a minimally invasive surgical procedure. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2011;19:277-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-010-1213-2
  15. Pandit H, Hamilton TW, Jenkins C, Mellon SJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW. The clinical outcome of minimally invasive Phase 3 Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a 15-year follow-up of 1000 UKAs. Bone Joint J. 2015;97:1493-500.
  16. Gonzalez MH, Mekhail AO. The failed total knee arthroplasty: evaluation and etiology. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2004;12:436-46. https://doi.org/10.5435/00124635-200411000-00008
  17. 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;84:2235-9. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200212000-00017
  18. Koskinen E, Paavolainen P, Eskelinen A, Pulkkinen P, Remes V. Unicondylar knee replacement for primary osteoarthritis: a prospective follow-up study of 1,819 patients from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop. 2007;78:128-35. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453670610013538
  19. Choy WS, Lee KW, Kim HY, Kim KJ, Chun YS, Yang DS. Mobile bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients whose lifestyles involve high degrees of knee flexion: a 10-14year follow-up study. Knee. 2017;24:829-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2017.05.004
  20. Thambyah A, Fernandez J. Squatting-related tibiofemoral shear reaction forces and a biomechanical rationale for femoral component loosening. ScientificWorldJournal. 2014;2014:785175.
  21. Goodfellow J, O'Connor J, Dodd C. Unicompartmental arthroplasty with the Oxford knee. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.
  22. Vasso M, Del Regno C, D'Amelio A, Viggiano D, Corona K, Schiavone Panni A. Minor varus alignment provides better results than neutral alignment in medial UKA. Knee. 2015;22:117-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2014.12.004
  23. Voss F, Sheinkop MB, Galante JO, Barden RM, Rosenberg AG. Miller-Galante unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at 2- to 5-year follow-up evaluations. J Arthroplasty. 1995;10:764-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-5403(05)80072-5
  24. Romanowski MR, Repicci JA. Minimally invasive unicondylar arthroplasty: eight-year follow-up. J Knee Surg. 2002;15:17-22.
  25. Kim HJ, Kim TS, Mun JU, Kyung HS. Results of high-flex total knee arthroplasty: minimum 3-year follow-up result. J Korean Orthop Assoc. 2016;51:145-50. https://doi.org/10.4055/jkoa.2016.51.2.145
  26. Moon KH, Lee DJ, Lee JS, Kim YT. Total knee replacement arthroplasty with $NexGen^{(R)}$-LPS: minimum 5 year follow-up results. J Korean Orthop Assoc. 2011;46:405-11. https://doi.org/10.4055/jkoa.2011.46.5.405
  27. Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;248:13-4.