Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2021; 88(4):291-301 | DOI: 10.55095/achot2021/044
Accuracy of Alignment of Femoral and Tibial Component of the Oxford Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Using Zimmer Microplasty® InstrumentationOriginal papers
- 1 Nemocnice České Budějovice, a.s., Ortopedické oddělení, České Budějovice
- 2 Jihočeská univerzita, Zdravotně sociální fakulta, České Budějovice
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY:
The purpose of the study is to verify the correct alignment of components of the Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using the Zimmer Microplasty® instrumentation at the beginning of the learning curve. The implantation of prosthetic components of partial knee arthroplasty in proper alignment has an effect on long-term survival of the prosthesis and should eliminate the occurrence of frequent complications.
MATERIAL AND METHODS:
The study group includes 20 patients, 9 men with the mean age of 68 years (range 62-78 years) and 11 women with the mean age of 69 years (range 52-81 years). 13 patients underwent surgery on the right knee and 7 patients on the left knee. The mean length of symptoms was 13 months (range 7-20 months), the mean varus knee deformity was 7° (range 4-12°). The selected patients met both the clinical and radiological criteria for enrolment in the study. In all of them medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty was performed in 2019 by the same surgeon. After surgery, the parameters of accuracy of alignment of individual prosthetic components were measured on the full-length radiograph of the limb under load. The WOMAC score was recorded preoperatively and one year after surgery and subsequently compared. The knee joint flexion preoperatively and one year after surgery was evaluated.
RESULTS:
The analysis of radiographs revealed that in 12 cases the femoral component was implanted in the mean valgus angle of 1.6° (range 1-3°) and in 8 cases in the mean varus angle of 3° (range 1-5°). All femoral components were implanted in the mean flexion of 7.3° (range 3-11°), no component was implanted in extension. As concerns the tibial component, 19 components were implanted in a neutral or minimum varus angle with the mean value of 1.1° (range 0.3-4°). One component only was implanted in the valgus angle of 1°. All tibial components were implanted with the mean dorsal slope of 6.5° (range 4-8°). The incision was 5 mm deep on average (range 3-6 mm). There was a slight divergence between the components, namely 2.8° on average (range 2-7°) and the distance between the components was 4mm on average (range 3-5 mm). The mean knee joint flexion achieved preoperatively by patients was 115° (range 110-123°), whereas postoperatively the mean flexion achieved was 126° (range 111-138°). The preoperative Womac score was 84.5 points on average (range 64-96 points), whereas postoperatively it was 26.4 points on average (range 7-52 points).
None of the components was implanted outside the permitted range, no early complications of the partial replacement (luxation of polyethylene mobile bearing insert, early loosening of the prosthesis, tibial fracture) were observed.
DISCUSSION:
Our radiographic measurements show that when Zimmer Microplasty® instrumentation is used correct alignment of the femoral and tibial component can be achieved and the individual components were correctly aligned within the recommended range. Every single component met the required criteria for alignment. When comparing the values obtained by us in measurements with those obtained by other authors from abroad, similar results regarding the alignment of components were achieved.
CONCLUSIONS:
When using Zimmer Microplasty® instrumentation, excellent results can be achieved also at the beginning of the learning curve of partial knee replacement.
Keywords: medial gonarthrosis, unicompartmental arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty, alignment of components
Published: August 15, 2021 Show citation
ACS | AIP | APA | ASA | Harvard | Chicago | Chicago Notes | IEEE | ISO690 | MLA | NLM | Turabian | Vancouver |
References
- Buček F, Komzák M, Hart R. Rotační kinematika kolenního kloubu před a po implantaci unikompartmentální mediální náhrady, srovnání se zdravým kolenním kloubem. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2019;86:33-38.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Gondusky JS, Choi L, Khalaf N, Patel J, Barnett S, Gorab R. Day of surgery discharge after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: an effective perioperative pathway. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29:516-519.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Hamilton TW, Pandit HG, Maurer DG, Ostlere SJ, Jenkins C, Mellon SJ, Dodd CAF, Murray DW. Anterior knee pain and evidence of osteoarthritis of the patellofemoral joint should not be considered contraindications to mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a 15-year follow-up. Bone Joint J. 2017;99:632-639.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Hernigou P, Deschamps G. Posterior slope of the tibial implant and the outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:506-511.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Hiranaka T, Tanaka T, Fujishiro T, Anjiki K, Nagata N, Kitazawa D, Kotoura K, Okamoto K, Thar C. Is postoperative flexion angle genuinely better in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty than in total knee arthroplasty? A comparison between the knees in the same patients. Knee. 2020;27:1907-1913.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Jahoda D, Nyč O, Pokorný D, Landor I, Sosna A. Antibiotika v prevenci infekčních komplikací u operací kloubních náhrad. Acta Chir. orthop. Traum. čech. 2006;73:108-114.
Go to original source...
- Koh IJ, Kim JH, Jang SW, Kim MS, Kim C, In Y. Are the Oxford® medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty new instruments reducing the bearing dislocation risk while improving components relationships? A case control study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2016;102:183-187.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Koudela K Jr, Koudelová J, Koudela K Sr, Kunešová M, Křen J, Pokorný J. Radiologická měření u aloplastiky kolenního kloubu a jejich význam pro praxi. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2010;77:304-311.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Kumar V, Nayak M, Panthee R, Yadav R, Marendupaka S. A technical tip to avert meniscal rotation and dislocation in a mobile bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Case Rep Orthop Res 2020;3:42-48.
Go to original source...
- Kwon HM, Kang KT, Kim JH, Park KK. Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to patients with a ligamentous deficiency can cause biomechanically poor outcomes. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020;28:2846-2853.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Leiss F, Götz JS, Maderbacher G, Zeman F, Meissner W, Grifka J, Benditz A, Greimel F. Pain management of unicompartmental (UKA) vs. total knee arthroplasty (TKA) based on a matched pair analysis of 4144 cases. Sci Rep. 2020;10:17660..
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Lum ZC, Lombardi AV, Hurst JM, Morris MJ, Adams JB, Berend KR. Early outcomes of twin-peg mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared with primary total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J. 2016;98:28-33
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Mancuso F, Dodd CA, Murray DW, Pandit H. Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the ACL-deficient knee. J Orthop Traumatol. 2016;17:267-275.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Mannová J, Kubát P, Pospíchal M, Longin P. Hodnocení účinnosti systémového podání tranexamové kyseliny (Exacylu) u náhrad kyčelního a kolenního kloubu - prospektivní kohortová studie. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2019;86:118-123.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Matthieu O, Christophe J, Antoine L, Sebastien P, Argenson JN. Long-term results of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for knee avascular necrosis. J Arthroplasty. 2019;34:465-468.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Mehl J, Paul J, Feucht MJ, Bode G, Imhoff AB, Südkamp NP, Hinterwimmer S. ACL deficiency and varus osteoarthritis: high tibial osteotomy alone or combined with ACL reconstruction? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2017;137;233-240.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Mohammad HR, Matharu GS, Judge A, Murray DW. New surgical instrumentation reduces the revision rate of unicompartmental knee replacement: a propensity score matched comparison of 15,906 knees from the National Joint Registry. Knee. 2020;27:993-1002.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Shinichi F, Kenji F, Kei T, Takeharu S, Kunio T. Medium-term clinical results of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment for spontaneous osteonecrosis of the knee with four to 15 years of follow-up. The Knee. 2019;26:1111-1116.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Sobek J, Hart R, Komzák M. Klinické výsledky po totální náhradě kolenního kloubu v závislosti na rotaci femorální komponenty vzhledem k původním anatomickým poměrům na distálním femuru. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2020;87:75-81.
Go to original source...
- Song MH, Kim BH, Ahn SJ, Yoo SH, Lee MS. Early complications after minimally invasive mobile-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:1281-1284.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Vasso M, Corona K, D'Apolito R, Mazzitelli G, Panni AS. Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Modes of Failure and Conversion to Total Knee Arthroplasty. Joints. 2017;5:44-50.
Go to original source...
Go to PubMed...
- Tyagi V, Farooq M. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: indications, outcomes, and complications. Conn Med. 2017;81;87-90.
Go to PubMed...