Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Alignment in Medial Fixed-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: The Limb Has a Leg Up on the Component.
Slaven, Sean E; Cody, John P; Sershon, Robert A; Ho, Henry; Hopper, Robert H; Fricka, Kevin B.
Afiliação
  • Slaven SE; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD.
  • Cody JP; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD.
  • Sershon RA; Inova Mount Vernon Hospital Joint Replacement Center, Alexandria, VA; Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute, Alexandria, VA.
  • Ho H; Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute, Alexandria, VA.
  • Hopper RH; Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute, Alexandria, VA.
  • Fricka KB; Inova Mount Vernon Hospital Joint Replacement Center, Alexandria, VA; Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute, Alexandria, VA.
J Arthroplasty ; 36(12): 3883-3887, 2021 12.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34489145
BACKGROUND: To assess how implant alignment affects unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) outcome, we compared tibial component alignment of well-functioning UKAs against 2 groups of failed UKAs, revised for progression of lateral compartment arthritis ("Progression") and aseptic loosening ("Loosening"). METHODS: We identified 37 revisions for Progression and 61 revisions for Loosening from our prospective institutional database of 3351 medial fixed-bearing UKAs performed since 2000. Revision cohorts were matched on age, gender, body mass index, and postoperative range of motion with "Successful" unrevised UKAs with minimum 10-year follow-up and Knee Society Score ≥70. Tibial component coronal (TCA) and sagittal (TSA) plane alignment was measured on postoperative radiographs. Limb alignment was quantified by hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle on long-leg radiographs. In addition to directly comparing groups, a multivariate logistic regression examined how limb and component alignments were associated with UKA revision. RESULTS: In the Progression group, component alignment was similar to the matched successes (TCA 3.6° ± 3.5° varus vs 5.1° ± 3.5° varus, P = .07; TSA 8.4° ± 4.4° vs 8.8° ± 3.6°, P = .67), whereas HKA angle was significantly more valgus (0.3° ± 3.6° valgus vs 4.4° ± 2.6° varus, P < .001). Loosening group component alignment was also similar to the matched successes (TCA 6.1° ± 3.7° varus vs 5.9° ± 3.1° varus, P = .72; TSA 8.4° ± 4.6° vs 8.1° ± 3.9°, P = .68), and HKA was significantly more varus (6.1° ± 3.1° varus vs 4.0° ± 2.7° varus, P < .001). Using a multivariate logistic regression, HKA angle was the most significant factor associated with revision (P < .001). CONCLUSION: In this population of revised UKAs and long-term successes, limb alignment was a more important determinant of outcome than tibial component alignment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III case-control study.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Artroplastia do Joelho / Osteoartrite do Joelho / Prótese do Joelho Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Arthroplasty Assunto da revista: ORTOPEDIA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Artroplastia do Joelho / Osteoartrite do Joelho / Prótese do Joelho Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Arthroplasty Assunto da revista: ORTOPEDIA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos