Impact of Chronic Opioid Use on Postoperative Mobility Recovery and Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Propensity-Matched Study.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use prior to total joint arthroplasty may be associated with poorer postoperative outcomes. However, few studies have reported the impact on postoperative recovery of mobility. We hypothesized that chronic opioid users would demonstrate impaired objective and subjective mobility recovery compared to nonusers. METHODS: A secondary data analysis of a multicenter, prospective observational cohort study in which patients used a smartphone-based care management platform with a smartwatch for self-directed rehabilitation following hip or knee arthroplasty was performed. Patients were matched 2:1 based on age, body mass index, sex, procedure, Charnley class, ambulatory status, orthopedic procedure history, and anxiety. Postoperative mobility outcomes were measured by patient-reported ability to walk unassisted at 90 days, step counts, and responses to the 5-level EuroQol-5 dimension 5-level, compared by Chi-square and student's t-tests. Unmatched cohorts were also compared to investigate the impact of matching. RESULTS: A total of 153 preoperative chronic opioid users were matched to 306 opioid-naïve patients. Age (61.9 ± 10.5 versus 62.1 ± 10.3, P = .90) and sex (53.6 versus 53.3% women, P = .95) were similar between groups. The proportion of people who reported walking unassisted for 90 days did not vary in the matched cohort (87.8 versus 90.7%, P = .26). Step counts were similar preoperatively and 1-month postoperatively but were lower in opioid users at 3 and 6 months postoperatively (4,823 versus 5,848, P = .03). More opioid users reported moderate to extreme problems with ambulation preoperatively on the 5-level EuroQol-5 dimension 5-level (80.6 versus 69.0%, P = .02), and at 6 months (19.2 versus 9.3%, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Subjective and objective measures of postoperative mobility were significantly reduced in patients who chronically used opioid medications preoperatively. Even after considering baseline factors that may affect ambulation, objective mobility metrics following arthroplasty were negatively impacted by preoperative chronic opioid use.

Robotic-assisted patellofemoral arthroplasty provides excellent implant survivorship and high patient satisfaction at mid-term follow-up.

PURPOSE: Robotic adoption in knee surgery has yielded several benefits, but its application in patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) remains barely reported. The purpose of this study was to determine implant survival, patient satisfaction, and functional outcomes after robotic-assisted PFA at an intermediate follow-up. METHODS: This prospective analysis targeted 18 knees of 16 consecutive patients who underwent robot-aided PFA with three-year minimum follow-up (range, 3 to 6 years). Each patient was evaluated collecting pre-operative and post-operative medical record data, including range of motion, radiographic images, and multiple scores, such as VAS, APKS, and OKS. RESULTS: At surgery, the mean age was 55.4 years ± 14.4 (range, 32 to 78 years), and the mean BMI was 26.8 kg/m² ±5.2 (range, 20 to 36). Etiologies of patellofemoral osteoarthritis included idiopathic degeneration (28%), post-traumatic (33%), and dysplasia (39%). Pre-implantation scores were VAS 7.9 ± 1.4, AKPS 34.6 ± 23.3, and OKS 17.3 ± 10.3. One implant was revised with primary total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis progression. Clinical and radiographic follow-up showed no signs of loosening or infection. The maximum flexion reached an average of 131.1°±10.5° (range, 110° to 145°), accompanied by significantly improved score results (P-value < 0.01): VAS 1.1 ± 1.4, AKPS 90.2 ± 8.6, and OKS 46.3 ± 1.8. CONCLUSIONS: At 3 years after robotic assisted patellofemoral arthroplasty, excellent implant survival and patient satisfaction rates can be expected along with significantly improved functional and pain control outcomes. Although the limitations imposed by the restricted cohort, these findings indicate that robotic assistance in PFA is both safe and effective at intermediate follow-up.

The effect of high tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty on patellofemoral joint in young patients with medial knee arthrosis.

INTRODUCTION: Osteoarthritis of the knee is a debilitating disease. In most cases, only the medial compartments are affected. High tibial osteotomy (HTO) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are the two main procedures commonly used in the surgical treatment of unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis patients not responding to conservative treatment. The aim of our study was to compare UKA and biplanar medial open-wedge HTO in terms of patellofemoral changes and functional score in patients under 60 years of age with medial compartment arthrosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study. A total of 79 patients (37 HTO, 42 UKA) who received one of the two treatments in a single center were examined preoperatively and at a single postoperative follow-up. Posterior tibial slope, lateral patellofemoral angle (LPFA), Q-angle, patellar height, Cincinnati Rating System and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) functional scores were evaluated in all patients preoperatively and at the 6-month follow-up examination. RESULTS: Insall-Salvati ratio remained stable in the HTO group, while there was a minor decrease in the UKA group and the changes between the groups were not statistically significant. Caton-Deschamps ratio increased in the UKA group and decreased in the HTO group, and this change was statistically significant (p < 0.001). LPFA did not change in the UKA group in the postoperative period, while it increased in the HTO group (p < 0.001). Changes in Q angle and Cincinnati Rating System scores were statistically similar between the UKA and HTO groups (p = 0.827 and p = 0.340). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, biplanar medial open-wedge HTO and UKA performed with appropriate surgical technique had no negative effect on patellofemoral joint. In patients under 60 years of age with medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee, both surgical treatments can be performed with appropriate patient selection.

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasties: does the type of tibial component selected influence implant survival?

INTRODUCTION: Few information has been published on the survival of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and fixed-bearing tibial components. The aim of this study is to analyze if UKA survival varies according to UKA model used and to analyze the possible risk factors for UKA revision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study analyzing 301 UKAs (ACCURIS, all-polyethylene tibial component, 152; Triathlon PKR, metal-backed tibial component, 149) was performed. Demographic parameters as well as implant survival and cause of prosthetic revision were analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, the log-rank test and the Cox multiple regression were used for the analysis. RESULTS: Average follow-up was 8.1 ± 3.08-years. Average age was 68.1 ± 8.6-years; 70.4% of subjects were women. The ACCURIS UKA group had a UKA revision rate higher compared to the Triathlon PKR group (16/152, 10.6% vs 5/149, 3.4%, respectively; p < 0.001). The main cause of prosthetic revision was aseptic loosening (5/21, 23.8%). All aseptic loosening cases and tibial component collapse were reported with the ACCURIS UKA group. Overall UKA survival was 98.01% (95% CI 95.62-99.1) at 1-year, 94.27% (95% CI 90.95-96.4) at 5-years and 92.38% (95% CI 88.48-94.99) at 10-years' follow-up. There were no differences in the Kaplan-Meier survival curves regarding operated side or affected tibiofemoral compartment (log-rank test = 0.614 and 0.763, respectively). However, Kaplan-Meier survival curve according to UKA model used was different (log-rank test = 0.033). The metal-backed component appeared to be a protector factor for UKA revision when adjusted for age, sex, operated side, and affected tibiofemoral compartment (Hazard Ratio 0.32, p = 0.031). CONCLUSION: Fixed-bearing UKAs showed excellent mid- and long-term survival rates. Aseptic loosening is the main cause of implant failure. PKR group (metal-backed component) seem to be a protector factor to UKA revision when it was compared with ACCURIS UKA group (all-polyethylene tibial component).

A radiographic artificial intelligence tool to identify candidates suitable for partial knee arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Knee osteoarthritis is a prevalent condition frequently necessitating knee replacement surgery, with demand projected to rise substantially. Partial knee arthroplasty (PKA) offers advantages over total knee arthroplasty (TKA), yet its utilisation remains low despite guidance recommending consideration alongside TKA in shared decision making. Radiographic decision aids exist but are underutilised due to clinician time constraints. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This research develops a novel radiographic artificial intelligence (AI) tool using a dataset of knee radiographs and a panel of expert orthopaedic surgeons' assessments. Six AI models were trained to identify PKA candidacy. RESULTS: 1241 labelled four-view radiograph series were included. Models achieved statistically significant accuracies above random assignment, with EfficientNet-ES demonstrating the highest performance (AUC 95%, F1 score 83% and accuracy 80%). CONCLUSIONS: The AI decision tool shows promise in identifying PKA candidates, potentially addressing underutilisation of this procedure. Its integration into clinical practice could enhance shared decision making and improve patient outcomes. Further validation and implementation studies are warranted to assess real-world utility and impact.

A decreased tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance is associated with lateral patellofemoral joint degeneration after implantation of medial fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty - a minimum five year follow-up.

PURPOSE: The influence of lateral patellofemoral osteoarthritis (PFOA) in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is controversial. Our aim was to identify radiographic factors that may lead to progressive PFOA after implantation of a fixed-bearing medial UKA and their impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROMs). METHODS: A retrospective consecutive cohort of patients undergoing medial UKA with a minimum follow-up of 60 months between September 2011 and January 2017 was identified. All UKAs had a fixed-bearing design with cemented femoral and tibial components. PROMs included documentation of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS). The following radiographic parameters were evaluated on conventional radiographs and computer tomography (CT) scans: patella tilt angle, patella congruence angle, Caton-Deschamps index, medial and lateral patellofemoral degeneration (Kellgren-Lawrence Classification (KL)), mechanical anteroposterior axis, femoral torsion, tibial tuberosity to trochlear groove distance (TTTG), anteroposterior translation of the femoral component. A hierarchical multiple regression analysis and partial Pearson correlation analysis (SPSS) were used to evaluate for predictors of progression of lateral PFOA. RESULTS: Forty-nine knees allowed PFOA assessment and had an average follow-up of 62 months (range 60-108). Twenty-three patients did not exhibit any progression of lateral PFOA. Twenty-two progressed with 1 stage, whereas four had progressed 2 stages according to the KL classification. TTTG negatively correlated with progressive lateral PFOA (r = - 0.436, p = 0.01). Progression of lateral PFOA did not correlate with OKS at last follow-up (p = 0.613). CONCLUSION: A decreased TTGT correlated with radiographic progression of lateral PFOA after medial fixed-bearing cemented UKA. PFOA however did not influence PROMs at a minimum of five years postoperatively.

Short- to mid-term results of minimally invasive lateral unicompartmental knee replacement: 133 cases in a non-designer series.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the current study was to demonstrate short- to mid-term survivorship as well as clinical outcome of lateral unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) with a fixed-bearing (FB) design from a non-designer center using the Oxford Fixed Lateral prosthesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort study reports the results of 133 consecutive lateral FB-UKR. Survivorship analysis was performed with different endpoints and clinical outcome was measured using the Oxford-Knee-Score (OKS), American-Knee-Society-Score (AKSS-O), range-of-motion (ROM) and visual-analog-scale for pain (VAS). RESULTS: There were two revision surgeries with conversion to total knee replacements (TKR) due to persistent pain resulting in a survival rate of 98.5% (95% CI 93.5-99.6) with a mean follow-up (FU) of 3.3 ± 1.8 years (range 1-8.5). All outcome scores, VAS and ROM showed a significant improvement at final FU (p < 0.001). The OKS improved from 26 ± 7.8 (range 11-45) preoperatively to 39 ± 8.3 (range 13-48), the AKSS-O from 49.2 ± 14.6 (range 18-90) to 81.8 ± 15.1 (range 40-100), the AKSS-F from 53 ± 23.7 (range 0-100) to 80.4 ± 21.4 (range 5-100) and the ROM from 118 ± 17 (range 90-160) to 134 ± 9.5 (range 100-155). CONCLUSIONS: The short- to mid-term results following lateral FB-UKR demonstrate a high survivorship and good clinical outcome from an independent series. We, therefore, suggest that FB-UKR is a safe treatment option for isolated lateral OA if sufficient surgical experience is provided. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective cohort study, level IV.

Relevant changes of leg alignment after customised individually made bicompartmental knee arthroplasty due to overstuffing.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to analyse the change in knee alignment after customised individually made (CIM) bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (BKA) and the subsequent consequences for patellar tracking. METHODS: Medical records of 23 patients who received 26 CIM BKA (ConforMIS iDuo G2) at our clinic between November 2015 and July 2018 were reviewed. The objective part of the Knee Society Score (KSS), the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), the tibial mechanical angle (TMA) and femoral mechanical angle (FMA) were recorded preoperative and four months postoperative. Leg alignment was classified as neutral (HKA = 180° ± 3°), varus (HKA < 177°) or valgus (HKA > 183°). Furthermore, patellar tracking was determined on skyline view radiographs and adverse events were recorded. Implant survival rate was determined with the Kaplan-Meier method. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were pain, satisfaction, overall improvement and if the patient would undergo the surgery again. RESULTS: The mean KSS improved from 61 points preoperative [standard deviation (SD) 14] to 90 points postoperative (SD 7, p < 0.001). The mean change for HKA was 6.3° (SD 3.5), for TMA 1.5° (SD 1.2) and for FMA 3.8° (SD 2.3). Postoperative leg alignment was neutral in 13 CIM BKA (50%), varus in two (8%) and valgus in 11 (42%) and patella tracking was central in 19 CIM BKA (73%) and lateral in seven (27%), respectively. Adverse events occurred in five CIM BKA: three patients required a patella resurfacing and one patient with bilateral CIM BKA needed a revision to a total knee arthroplasty. Implant survival rate was 92.3% at a follow-up of 3.2 years (SD 0.8). PROMs for CIM BKA without revision surgery were available at a mean follow-up of 3.2 years (SD 0.8). Mean pain with level walking decreased to 0.8 points (SD 1.4, p < 0.001) and mean pain with stairs or inclines to 1.6 points (SD 1.3, p < 0.001). Patient satisfaction was very satisfied or satisfied (78%), neutral (17%) or unsatisfied (4%). Overall improvement was much better or considerably better for 91% of all patients; 87% would undergo the surgery again. CONCLUSION: A relevant change of the leg axis away from the treated femorotibial compartment due to overstuffing was observed. Although, neutral leg alignment was not restored in every case, clinical and patient-reported outcomes improved significantly. Further studies with long-term clinical and patient-reported outcomes are required to evaluate whether patients with bicompartmental knee osteoarthritis benefit from CIM BKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, case series.

Insufficient evidence to confirm benefits of custom partial knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesise the available literature and critically appraise current evidence on the functional and radiographic outcomes as well as reoperation and revision rates of custom partial knee arthroplasty, i.e., unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (BKA), and patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This systematic review was performed in accordance with the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and a protocol was registered with Prospero. On 25 May 2021, two authors independently searched and screened Level I-IV studies that reported on outcomes of custom partial knee arthroplasty using the databases of MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, and the Cochrane Library without restriction on date of publication. Findings from eligible articles were synthesised and tabulated, and quality assessments were done according to the guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklists. RESULTS: Fifteen articles were eligible for data extraction, of which two comparative and four case series were on custom UKA (follow-up, 0-9 months), one comparative and five case series on custom BKA (follow-up, 0.25-72 months), and three case series on custom PFA (follow-up, 2-119 months). Three studies on custom UKA reported mean Knee Society Score (KSS) Knee of 86-94 and mean KSS Function of 94-95, and two studies on custom BKA reported mean KSS Knee of 90-94 and KSS function of 81, whereas one study on custom PFA reported KSS Knee of 91 and KSS Function of 89. Custom implants tended to have less bone-implant mismatch compared to off the shelf (OTS) implants. Revision rates were 3-25% for custom UKA (at 0-109 months), 3-5% for custom BKA (at 12-72 months), and 0-14% for custom PFA (at 2-119 months). CONCLUSION: Due to the small number of comparative studies and lack of consistency in reported outcomes, it remains difficult to ascertain the benefits of custom partial knee arthroplasty. Anecdotal evidence suggests that, compared to OTS implants, custom implants result in less bone-implant mismatch and that 78-91% of patients are either satisfied or very satisfied after custom partial knee arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Adverse Events Associated With Robotic-Assisted Joint Arthroplasty: An Analysis of the US Food and Drug Administration MAUDE Database.

BACKGROUND: The use of robotic assistance in arthroplasty is increasing; however, the spectrum of adverse events potentially associated with this technology is unclear. Improved understanding of the causes of adverse events in robotic-assisted arthroplasty can prevent future incidents and enhance patient outcomes. METHODS: Adverse event reports to the US Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database involving robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and partial knee arthroplasty were reviewed to determine causes of malfunction and related patient impact. RESULTS: Overall, 263 adverse event reports were included. The most frequently reported adverse events were unexpected robotic arm movement for TKA (59/204, 28.9%) and retained registration checkpoint for THA (19/44, 43.2%). There were 99 reports of surgical delay with an average delay of 20 minutes (range 1-120). Thirty-one cases reported conversion to manual surgery. In total, 68 patient injuries were reported, 7 of which required surgical reintervention. Femoral notching (12/36, 33.3%) was the most common for TKA and retained registration checkpoint (19/28, 67.9%) was the most common for THA. Although rare, additional reported injuries included femoral, tibial, and acetabular fractures, MCL laceration, additional retained foreign bodies, and an electrical burn. CONCLUSION: Despite the increasing utilization of robotic-assisted arthroplasty in the United States, numerous adverse events are possible and technical difficulties experienced intraoperatively can result in prolonged surgical delays. The events reported herein seem to indicate that robotic-assisted arthroplasty is generally safe with only a few reported instances of serious complications, the nature of which seems more related to suboptimal surgical technique than technology. Based on our data, the practice of adding registration checkpoints and bone pins to the instrument count of all robotic-assisted TJA cases should be widely implemented to avoid unintended retained foreign objects.

The Performance of Diagnostic Tests for Identifying Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Failed Partial Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Indications for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and patello-femoral arthroplasty are expanding. Despite the lower published infection rates for UKA and patello-femoral arthroplasty than total knee arthroplasty, periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a devastating complication and diagnostic thresholds for commonly utilized tests have not been investigated recently. Thus, this study evaluated if diagnostic thresholds for PJI in patients who had a failed partial knee arthroplasty (PKA) align more closely with previously reported thresholds specific to UKA or the 2018 International Consensus Meeting on Musculoskeletal Infection. METHODS: We identified 109 knees in 100 patients that underwent PKA with eventual conversion to total knee arthroplasty within a single healthcare system from 2000 to 2021. Synovial fluid nucleated cell count and synovial polymorphonuclear percentage in addition to preoperative serum erythrocyte sedimentation rate, serum C-reactive protein, and serum white blood cell count were compared with Student's t-tests between septic and aseptic cases. Receiver operating characteristic curves and Youden's index were used to assess diagnostic performance and the optimal cutoff point of each test. RESULTS: Synovial nucleated cell count, synovial polymorphonuclear percentage, and serum C-reactive protein demonstrated excellent discrimination for diagnosing PJI with an area under the curve of 0.97 and lower cutoff values than the previously determined UKA specific criteria. Serum erythrocyte sedimentation rateESR demonstrated good ability with an area under the curve of 0.89. CONCLUSION: Serum and synovial fluid diagnostic thresholds for PJI in PKAs align more closely with the thresholds established by the 2018 International Consensus Meeting as compared to previously proposed thresholds specific to UKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty After Failed Open-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists whether or not a previous high tibial osteotomy (HTO) influences the outcome and survival of a unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate clinical, radiological, and functional outcomes of UKA after failed open-wedge HTO compared with UKA with no previous HTO. METHODS: Between 2001 and 2017, 24 post-HTO UKAs (group A) with an average follow-up of 8.1 years (range: 5 to 13) were compared with a control group of 30 patients undergoing simple UKA (group B) with an average follow-up of 9.5 years (range: 2 to 16). All patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively using Knee Society Score, University of California at Los Angeles Activity Score, Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index, and through objective evaluation. Mechanical coronal alignment and Caton-Deschamps index were measured both preoperatively and postoperatively. RESULTS: In both groups, Knee Society Score, University of California at Los Angeles Activity Score, and Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index scores significantly improved at follow-up (P < .001). In addition, statistically significant greater improvements in clinical and functional scores were reported in group B compared with group A (P < .001). No statistically significant differences concerning postoperative mechanical axis were observed between groups (2.7° and 3.2°, respectively, P = .27) and with regard to Caton-Deschamps index (1.0° and 1.1°, respectively, P = .44). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated improvements in clinical and functional outcomes compared with preoperatory status in both groups irrespective of a previous HTO. A prior HTO was a determinant for having reduced postoperative clinical and functional outcomes after UKA.

Contemporary knee arthroplasty: one fits all or time for diversity?

INTRODUCTION: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has historically been the preferred solution for any type of knee osteoarthritis, independently of the number of compartments involved. In these days of patient-specific medicine, mono-compartmental disease could also be approached with a more individualized treatment, such as partial knee arthroplasty (PKA). Off-the-shelf (OTS) implants are often the compromise of averages and means of a limited series of anatomical parameters retrieved from patients and the pressure of cost control by limited inventory. Personalized medicine requires respect and interest for the individual shape and alignment of each patient. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Pubmed and Google Scholar search were performed with the following terms: "patient-specific knee" and "arthroplasty" and "custom implant" and "total knee replacement" and "partial knee replacement" and "patellofemoral knee replacement" and "bicompartmental knee replacement". The full text of 90 articles was used to write this narrative review. RESULTS: Unicondylar, patellofemoral and bicompartmental knee arthroplasty are successful treatment options, which can be considered over TKA for their bone and ligament sparing character and the superior functional outcome that can be obtained with resurfacing procedures. For TKA, where compromises dominate our choices, especially in patients with individual variations of their personal anatomy outside of the standard, a customized implant could be a preferable solution. CONCLUSION: TKA might not be the only solution for every patient with knee osteoarthritis, if personalized medicine wants to be offered. Patient-specific mono-compartmental resurfacing solutions, such as partial knee arthroplasty, can be part of the treatment options proposed by the expert surgeon. Customized implants and personalized alignment options have the potential to further improve clinical outcome by identifying the individual morphotype and respecting the diversity of the surgical population.

[Focal femoral resurfacing and unicompartmental knee replacement : Between osteotomy and total knee replacement]. / Fokaler Oberflächenersatz und unikompartimenteller Gelenkersatz : Im Grenzbereich zwischen Achskorrektur und Totalendoprothetik.

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, especially for both femorotibial compartments of the knee, is an established partly joint-saving treatment option for osteoarthritis of the knee if the disease is limited to one compartment. Even smaller implants or resurfacing of the patellofemoral joint have been shown-in smaller patient collectives-to have the potential to yield good clinical results.

Patellofemoral Arthroplasty Surgical Technique: Lateral or Medial Parapatellar Approach.

BACKGROUND: Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) is an emerging treatment for patients with isolated patellofemoral compartment osteoarthritis. The medial parapatellar approach is the standard arthrotomy but has been shown in total knee arthroplasty to damage the patellar blood supply and increase postoperative patellar instability. The lateral parapatellar approach is an alternative that may reduce the risk of these outcomes. The purpose of this study is to compare the radiographic measures of patellar tracking and patient-reported outcomes of the medial and lateral parapatellar approaches in PFA. METHODS: Between 2012 and 2019, a retrospective review was performed of 136 knees undergoing PFA at a single institution. Patients were separated by preoperative congruence angle and then surgical approach into 3 cohorts. Preoperative and postoperative patellar tilt and congruence angle were measured. Preoperative and minimum 6-month postoperative patient-reported outcomes scores were collected. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the mean postoperative congruence angle and postoperative patient-reported outcomes among the 3 cohorts. Mean postoperative patellar tilt was normalized only in the abnormal congruence angle/lateral approach group to 2.80° (standard error, 1.85). CONCLUSION: Congruence angle was improved regardless of surgical approach. Patellar tilt was normalized only for the lateral approach in patients with abnormal preoperative congruence angle. There were no significant differences in preoperative and postoperative scores between groups except for preoperative 12-item Short Form Mental Health Survey scores. This study supports that the lateral approach offers improved postoperative patellar tilt compared to a medial approach for PFA while achieving similar patient-reported outcomes.

Native rotational knee kinematics is restored after lateral UKA but not after medial UKA.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the intraoperative kinematics of medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) with those of the native knee using a navigation system. METHODS: Six fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were included in the study. Medial UKA was performed in all right knees and lateral UKA was performed in all left knees. All UKA procedures were performed with a computerised navigation system. The tibial internal rotation angle and coronal alignment of the mechanical axis during passive knee flexion were assessed as rotational and varus/valgus kinematics before and after surgery using the navigation system. RESULTS: The rotation angles of the tibia in the early flexion phase of medial UKA were significantly larger than those of native knees (p = 0.008 at minimum knee flexion, p = 0.008 at 0° knee flexion). The rotational kinematics of lateral UKA was similar to those of the native knees throughout knee flexion. There were no significant differences in varus/valgus kinematics between native and UKA knees. CONCLUSION: The rotational kinematics of the native knee was not restored after medial UKA but was preserved after lateral UKA. There were no significant differences in the varus/valgus kinematics after either medial or lateral UKA when compared with those of the native knees. Thus, the geometry of the medial tibial articular surface is a determinant of the ability to restore the rotational kinematics of the native knee. Surgeons and implant designers should be aware that the anatomical medial articular geometry is an important factor in restoration of the native knee kinematics after knee arthroplasty.

Revision of partial knee to total knee arthroplasty with use of patient-specific instruments results in acceptable femoral rotation.

PURPOSE: Patient-specific instruments (PSI) were initially developed for the alignment of both total knee- (TKA) and partial knee arthroplasty (PKA). We hypothesize that CT-based PSI for PKA-to-TKA revision surgery can restore biomechanical limb alignment and prosthetic component positioning in vivo as calculated pre-operatively, resulting in a limited percentages of outliers. METHODS: An imaging analysis was performed using CT-based 3D measurement methods based on a pre- and post-revision CT scan. Imaging data were gathered on 10 patients who were operated for PKA-to-TKA revision with the use of PSI based on CT imaging. The planned femur and tibia component position in vivo were compared with the pre-revision planned component position. Outliers were defined as deviations >3.0° from pre-revision planned position for the individual implant components. Adjustments (e.g. resection level and implant size) during surgery were recorded. RESULTS: The HKA axis was restored accurately in all patients with a mean post-operative HKA axis of 178.1° (1.4°). Five femoral (2 varus, 2 internal rotation and 1 extension) and 14 tibial guides (2 varus, 6 anterior slope, 3 internal rotation and 3 external rotation) on a total of 60 outcome measures were identified as outliers. During surgery, an intraoperative tibial resection of 2 mm extra was performed in three patients. In 80 and 70% for, respectively, the femur and tibia, the surgeon-planned size was implanted during surgery. All patient-specific guides fitted well in all patients. No intraoperative or post-operative complications related to surgery were registered. CONCLUSIONS: This study introduced a unique new concept regarding PSI, PKA-to-TKA revision surgery. Based on the results, we were unable to fully confirm our hypothesis. PSI as a "new" tool for PKA-to-TKA revision surgery appears to be an accurate tool for the alignment of the TKA femur component. The tibial guide seems more susceptible to errors, resulting in a substantial percentage of outliers. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective cohort study, Level II.

Revision of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty to Total Knee Arthroplasty: Is It as Good as a Primary Result?

BACKGROUND: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is touted as a more conservative, bone- and tissue-sparing procedure than total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Similarly, revision of UKA to TKA is generally a simpler procedure than revision of TKA to TKA and can be accomplished with primary TKA components in most cases. The purpose of this study was to review a consecutive series of patients undergoing revision of failed UKA to TKA to determine if etiology is similar to that reported in recent literature and evaluate if the results align more with primary TKA vs revision of TKA to TKA. METHODS: A query of our private practice registry from 1996 to 2015 revealed 184 patients (193 knees) who underwent revisions of failed UKA with minimum 2-year follow-up. The mean age was 63.5 (37-84) years, body mass index was 32.3 (19-57) kg/m2, and interval after UKA was 4.8 (0-35) years. The most prevalent indications for UKA revision were aseptic loosening (42%) arthritic progression (20%), and tibial collapse (14%). RESULTS: At 6.1-year mean follow-up (2-20), 8 knees (4.1%) required re-revision, which is similar to what we reported at 5.5 years in a group of primary TKA patients (6 of 189; 3.2%) and much lower than what we observed at 6.0 years in a recent study of aseptic revision TKA patients (35 of 278; 12.6%). In the study group, Knee Society clinical and function scores improved from 50.8 and 52.1 preoperatively to 83.4 and 67.6 at the most recent evaluation. Re-revisions were for aseptic loosening (3), instability (2), arthrofibrosis (2), and infection (1). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to published individual institution and national registry data, re-revision rates of failed UKA are equivalent to revision rates of primary TKA and substantially better than re-revision rates of revision TKA. These data should be used to counsel patients undergoing revision UKA to TKA.

Cementless fixation in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcome, failures, implant survival, and complications encountered with cementless fixation in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). METHODS: A systematic review of the literature on cementless fixation in UKA was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. The following database was comprehensively searched: PubMed, Cochrane, Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and Google Scholar. The keywords "unicompartmental", "unicondylar", "partial knee arthroplasty", and "UKA" were combined with each of the keyword "uncemented", "cementless" and "survival", "complications", and "outcome". The following data were extracted: demographics, clinical outcome, details of failures and revisions, cumulative survival, and complications encountered. The risk of bias of each study was estimated with the MINORS score and a further scoring system based on the presence of the primary outcomes. RESULTS: From a cohort of 63 studies identified using the above methodology, 10 papers (1199 knees) were included in the final review. The mean follow-up ranged from 2 to 11 years (median 5 years). The 5-year survival ranged from 90 to 99 % and the 10-year survival from 92 to 97 %. There were 48 revisions with an overall revision rate of 0.8 per 100 observed component-years. The most common cause of failure was progression of osteoarthritis in the retained compartment (0.9 %). The cumulative incidence of complications and revisions was comparable to that reported in similar studies on cemented UKAs. The advantages of cementless fixation include faster surgical time, avoidance of cementation errors, and lower incidence of radiolucent lines. CONCLUSIONS: Cementless fixation is a safe and effective alternative to cementation in medial UKA. Clinical outcome, failures, reoperation rate, and survival are similar to those reported for cemented implants with lower incidence of radiolucent lines. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.