Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty fails to completely restore normal gait patterns during level walking
- 276 Downloads
Gait analysis is a valuable instrument for measuring function objectively after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). However, most gait analysis studies have reported conflicting results for functional assessment after UKA. This meta-analysis compared the gait patterns of UKA patients and healthy controls during level walking.
Studies were included in the meta-analysis if they recorded vertical ground reaction force (GRF), flexion at initial contact, flexion at loading response, extension at mid-stance, flexion at swing, walking speed, cadence, and stride length in UKA patients or healthy controls.
Seven studies met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The UKA patients and healthy controls were similar in terms of vertical GRF (95% CI − 0.54 to 0.23; ns), flexion at initial contact (95% CI − 0.47 to 4.96; ns), flexion at loading response (95% CI − 1.29 to 3.69; ns), and flexion at swing (95% CI − 8.85 to 0.40; ns). In contrast, extension at mid-stance (95% CI 0.53 to 4.88; P = 0.01), walking speed (95% CI − 2.13 to − 0.15; P = 0.02), cadence (95% CI − 1.02 to − 0.25; P = 0.001), and stride length (95% CI − 2.02 to − 0.22; P = 0.01) differed significantly between groups. Subgroup analyses revealed that the pooled data were similar between groups: 1st maximum (heel strike), − 0.43 BW (ns); 1st minimum (mid-stance), 0.61 BW (ns); and 2nd maximum (toe off), − 0.46 BW (ns).
There were no significant differences in vertical GRF or overall kinematics in the sagittal plane between UKA patients and healthy controls during level walking. However, the UKA group had a significantly slower walking speed and cadence and a shorter stride length than healthy controls. The current findings suggest that, clinically, UKA fails to completely restore normal gait patterns.
Level of evidence
Level II, therapeutic study.
KeywordsUnicompartmental knee arthroplasty Kinematics Kinetics Gait Meta-analysis
This work was supported by Inha University Hospital Research Grant. The authors would like to thank Ms. Jae-Ok Park for her help in preparing the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
For this retrospective study, ethical approval is not required.
For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
- 5.Catani F, Benedetti MG, Bianchi L, Marchionni V, Giannini S, Leardini A (2012) Muscle activity around the knee and gait performance in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty patients: a comparative study on fixed- and mobile-bearing designs. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(6):1042–1048CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Mattsson E, Olsson E, Broström L-Å (1990) Assessment of walking before and after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A comparison of different methods. Scand J Rehab Med 22(1):45–50Google Scholar
- 19.Saari T, Tranberg R, Zugner R, Uvehammer J, Karrholm J (2005) Changed gait pattern in patients with total knee arthroplasty but minimal influence of tibial insert design: gait analysis during level walking in 39 TKR patients and 18 healthy controls. Acta Orthop 76(2):253–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar