Abstract
Purpose
The predictive role of patient-specific characteristics and radiographic parameters on medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) outcomes is well known, but knowledge of these predictors is lacking in lateral UKA. Therefore, purpose of this study was to assess the predictive role of these parameters on short-term functional outcomes of lateral UKA.
Methods
In this retrospective cohort study, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index scores were collected at 2-year follow-up (median 2.2 years, range 2.0–4.0 years) in 39 patients who underwent lateral UKA. Patient-specific characteristics included age, BMI and gender, while radiographic parameters included osteoarthritis severity of all three compartments and both preoperative and postoperative hip-knee-ankle alignment.
Results
BMI, gender, age and preoperative valgus alignment were not correlated with functional outcomes, while postoperative valgus alignment was correlated with functional outcomes (0.561; p = 0.001). Postoperative valgus of 3°–7° was correlated with better outcomes than more neutral (−2° to 3° valgus) alignment (96.7 vs. 85.6; p = 0.011). Postoperative alignment was a predictor when corrected for patient-specific characteristics (regression coefficient 4.1; p < 0.001) and radiological parameters (regression coefficient 3.8; p = 0.002).
Conclusions
Postoperative valgus alignment of 3°–7° was correlated with the best short-term functional outcomes in lateral UKA surgery, while patient-specific parameters and preoperative alignment were not correlated with functional outcomes. Based on these findings, a surgeon should aim for valgus alignment of 3°–7° when performing lateral UKA surgery for optimal functional outcomes.
Level of evidence
Prognostic study, Level II.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Annual Report 2014 Australian Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Register (2014). https://aoanjrr.dmac.adelaide.edu.au/documents/10180/172286/AnnualReport2014
Ashraf T, Newman JH, Evans RL, Ackroyd CE (2002) Lateral unicompartmental knee replacement survivorship and clinical experience over 21 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84(8):1126–1130
Baker PN, Jameson SS, Deehan DJ, Gregg PJ, Porter M, Tucker K (2012) Mid-term equivalent survival of medial and lateral unicondylar knee replacement: an analysis of data from a National Joint Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br 94(12):1641–1648
Bellamy N, Campbell J, Hill J, Band P (2002) A comparative study of telephone versus onsite completion of the WOMAC 3.0 osteoarthritis index. J Rheumatol 29(4):783–786
Bellamy N, Campbell J, Stevens J, Pilch L, Stewart C, Mahmood Z (1997) Validation study of a computerized version of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities VA3.0 Osteoarthritis Index. J Rheumatol 24(12):2413–2415
Bonutti PM, Goddard MS, Zywiel MG, Khanuja HS, Johnson AJ, Mont MA (2011) Outcomes of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty stratified by body mass index. J Arthroplasty 26(8):1149–1153
Chatellard R, Sauleau V, Colmar M, Robert H, Raynaud G, Brilhault J, Societe d’Orthopedie de Traumatologie de lO (2013) Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Does tibial component position influence clinical outcomes and arthroplasty survival? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 99(4 Suppl):S219–S225
Cheng T, Chen D, Zhu C, Pan X, Mao X, Guo Y, Zhang X (2013) Fixed- versus mobile-bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: Are failure modes different? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(11):2433–2441
Citak M, Cross MB, Gehrke T, Dersch K, Kendoff D (2015) Modes of failure and revision of failed lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasties. Knee 22(4):338–340
Evans JD (1996) Straightforward statistics for the behavioral sciences. Brooks/Cole Publishing, Pacific Grove
Harrington IJ (1983) Static and dynamic loading patterns in knee joints with deformities. J Bone Joint Surg Am 65(2):247–259
Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2004) Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 423:161–165
Hill PF, Vedi V, Williams A, Iwaki H, Pinskerova V, Freeman MA (2000) Tibiofemoral movement 2: the loaded and unloaded living knee studied by MRI. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82(8):1196–1198
Insall J, Aglietti P (1980) A five to seven-year follow-up of unicondylar arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 62(8):1329–1337
Iwaki H, Pinskerova V, Freeman MA (2000) Tibiofemoral movement 1: the shapes and relative movements of the femur and tibia in the unloaded cadaver knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82(8):1189–1195
Kandil A, Werner BC, Gwathmey WF, Browne JA (2015) Obesity, morbid obesity and their related medical comorbidities are associated with increased complications and revision rates after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 30(3):456–460
Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS (1957) Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis 16(4):494–502
Khamaisy S, Gladnick BP, Nam D, Reinhardt KR, Heyse TJ, Pearle AD (2015) Lower limb alignment control: Is it more challenging in lateral compared to medial unicondylar knee arthroplasty? Knee 22(4):347–350
Kozinn SC, Marx C, Scott RD (1989) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A 4.5–6-year follow-up study with a metal-backed tibial component. J Arthroplasty 4(Suppl):S1–S10
Kozinn SC, Scott R (1989) Unicondylar knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 71(1):145–150
Kuipers BM, Kollen BJ, Bots PC, Burger BJ, van Raay JJ, Tulp NJ, Verheyen CC (2010) Factors associated with reduced early survival in the Oxford phase III medial unicompartment knee replacement. Knee 17(1):48–52
Lustig S, Lording T, Frank F, Debette C, Servien E, Neyret P (2014) Progression of medial osteoarthritis and long term results of lateral unicompartmental arthroplasty: 10 to 18 year follow-up of 54 consecutive implants. Knee 21(S1):S26–S32
Moreland JR, Bassett LW, Hanker GJ (1987) Radiographic analysis of the axial alignment of the lower extremity. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69(5):745–749
Murray DW, Pandit H, Weston-Simons JS, Jenkins C, Gill HS, Lombardi AV, Dodd CA, Berend KR (2013) Does body mass index affect the outcome of unicompartmental knee replacement? Knee 20(6):461–465
Nakagawa S, Kadoya Y, Todo S, Kobayashi A, Sakamoto H, Freeman MA, Yamano Y (2000) Tibiofemoral movement 3: full flexion in the living knee studied by MRI. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82(8):1199–1200
Ohdera T, Tokunaga J, Kobayashi A (2001) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for lateral gonarthrosis: midterm results. J Arthroplasty 16(2):196–200
Pearle AD, O’Loughlin PF, Kendoff DO (2010) Robot-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 25(2):230–237
Pennington DW, Swienckowski JJ, Lutes WB, Drake GN (2006) Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: survivorship and technical considerations at an average follow-up of 12.4 years. J Arthroplasty 21(1):13–17
World Health Organization (1995) Physical status: The use and interpretation of anthropometry. Report of a WHO Expert Committee. World Health Organization Technical Report, Series 854, pp 1–452
Roche M, O’Loughlin PF, Kendoff D, Musahl V, Pearle AD (2009) Robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: preoperative planning and surgical technique. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 38(2 Suppl):10–15
Sah AP, Scott RD (2007) Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty through a medial approach. Study with an average five-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(9):1948–1954
Scott RD (2005) Lateral unicompartmental replacement: a road less traveled. Orthopedics 28(9):983–984
Scott RD, Cobb AG, McQueary FG, Thornhill TS (1991) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: eight- to 12-year follow-up evaluation with survivorship analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 271:96–100
Sebilo A, Casin C, Lebel B, Rouvillain JL, Chapuis S, Bonnevialle P, members of the Societe d’Orthopedie et de Traumatologie de lO (2013) Clinical and technical factors influencing outcomes of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: retrospective multicentre study of 944 knees. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 99(4 Suppl):S227–S234
Servien E, Saffarini M, Lustig S, Chomel S, Neyret P (2008) Lateral versus medial tibial plateau: morphometric analysis and adaptability with current tibial component design. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16(12):1141–1145
Sharma L, Song J, Felson DT, Cahue S, Shamiyeh E, Dunlop DD (2001) The role of knee alignment in disease progression and functional decline in knee osteoarthritis. JAMA 286(2):188–195
Skytta ET, Haapamaki V, Koivikko M, Huhtala H, Remes V (2011) Reliability of the hip-to-ankle radiograph in determining the knee and implant alignment after total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Belg 77(3):329–335
Smith JR, Robinson JR, Porteous AJ, Murray JR, Hassaballa MA, Artz N, Newman JH (2014) Fixed bearing lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-Short to midterm survivorship and knee scores for 101 prostheses. Knee 21(4):843–847
Specogna AV, Birmingham TB, DaSilva JJ, Milner JS, Kerr J, Hunt MA, Jones IC, Jenkyn TR, Fowler PJ, Giffin JR (2004) Reliability of lower limb frontal plane alignment measurements using plain radiographs and digitized images. J Knee Surg 17(4):203–210
Thompson SA, Liabaud B, Nellans KW, Geller JA (2013) Factors associated with poor outcomes following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: redefining the “classic” indications for surgery. J Arthroplasty 28(9):1561–1564
Vasso M, Del Regno C, D’Amelio A, Viggiano D, Corona K, Panni AS (2015) Minor varus alignment provides better results than neutral alignment in medial UKA. Knee 22(2):117–121
Von Keudell A, Sodha S, Collins J, Minas T, Fitz W, Gomoll AH (2014) Patient satisfaction after primary total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: an age-dependent analysis. Knee 21(1):180–184
Weidow J, Pak J, Karrholm J (2002) Different patterns of cartilage wear in medial and lateral gonarthrosis. Acta Orthop Scand 73(3):326–329
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
van der List, J.P., Chawla, H., Villa, J.C. et al. Early functional outcome after lateral UKA is sensitive to postoperative lower limb alignment. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25, 687–693 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3877-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3877-0