Skip to main content
Log in

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty fails to completely restore normal gait patterns during level walking

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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).

Conclusions

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andriacchi T, Ogle J, Galante J (1977) Walking speed as a basis for normal and abnormal gait measurements. J Biomech 10(4):261–268

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Andriacchi TP, Galante JO, Fermier RW (1982) The influence of total knee-replacement design on walking and stair-climbing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 64(9):1328–1335

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Argenson JN, Komistek RD, Aubaniac JM et al (2002) In vivo determination of knee kinematics for subjects implanted with a unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 17(8):1049–1054

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bade MJ, Kohrt WM, Stevens-Lapsley JE (2010) Outcomes before and after total knee arthroplasty compared to healthy adults. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 40(9):559–567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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):1042–1048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chassin EP, Mikosz RP, Andriacchi TP, Rosenberg AG (1996) Functional analysis of cemented medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 11(5):553–559

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Choy WS, Kim HY, Kim KJ, Kam BS (2007) A comparison of gait analysis after total knee arthroplasty and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the same patient. J Korean Orthop Assoc 42(4):505–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fuchs S, Tibesku CO, Frisse D, Laass H, Rosenbaum D (2003) Quality of life and gait after unicondylar knee prosthesis are inferior to age-matched control subjects. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 82(6):441–446

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Geller JA, Yoon RS, Macaulay W (2008) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a controversial history and a rationale for contemporary resurgence. J Knee Surg 21(1):7–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Greene KA, Schurman JR, 2nd (2008) Quadriceps muscle function in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 23(7 Suppl):15–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Heiden TL, Lloyd DG, Ackland TR (2009) Knee joint kinematics, kinetics and muscle co-contraction in knee osteoarthritis patient gait. Clin Biomech (Bristol Avon) 24(10):833–841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Jones GG, Kotti M, Wiik AV et al. (2016) Gait comparison of unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasties with healthy controls. Bone Joint J 98-B(10 Supple B):16–21

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim KT, Lee S, Lee JI (2016) Analysis and treatment of complications after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Relat Res 28(1):46–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kim YJ, Kim BH, Yoo SH (2017) Mid-term results of Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in young asian patients less than 60 years of age: a minimum 5-year follow-up. Knee Surg Relat Res 29(2):122–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ko YB, Gujarathi MR, Oh KJ (2015) Outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of comparative studies between fixed and mobile bearings focusing on complications. Knee Surg Relat Res 27(3):141–148

    Article  Google 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):45–50

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Metcalfe A, Stewart C, Postans N et al (2013) Abnormal loading of the major joints in knee osteoarthritis and the response to knee replacement. Gait Posture 37(1):32–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mundermann A, Dyrby CO, Hurwitz DE, Sharma L, Andriacchi TP (2004) Potential strategies to reduce medial compartment loading in patients with knee osteoarthritis of varying severity: reduced walking speed. Arthritis Rheum 50(4):1172–1178

    Article  Google 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):253–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Saccomanni B (2010) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a review of literature. Clin Rheumatol 29(4):339–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Smith AJ, Lloyd DG, Wood DJ (2004) Pre-surgery knee joint loading patterns during walking predict the presence and severity of anterior knee pain after total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Res 22(2):260–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Stacoff A, Kramers-de Quervain IA, Luder G, List R, Stussi E (2007) Ground reaction forces on stairs. Part II: knee implant patients versus normals. Gait Posture 26(1):48–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Studenski S, Perera S, Patel K et al (2011) Gait speed and survival in older adults. JAMA 305(1):50–58

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Van Kan GA, Rolland Y, Andrieu S et al (2009) Gait speed at usual pace as a predictor of adverse outcomes in community-dwelling older people an International Academy on Nutrition and Aging (IANA) Task Force. J Nutr Health Aging 13(10):881–889

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Webster KE, Wittwer JE, Feller JA (2003) Quantitative gait analysis after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis. J Arthroplast 18(6):751–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wiik AV, Manning V, Strachan RK, Amis AA, Cobb JP (2013) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty enables near normal gait at higher speeds, unlike total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 28(9):176–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Willis-Owen CA, Brust K, Alsop H, Miraldo M, Cobb JP (2009) Unicondylar knee arthroplasty in the UK National Health Service: an analysis of candidacy, outcome and cost efficacy. Knee 16(6):473–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Zambianchi F, Digennaro V, Giorgini A et al (2015) Surgeon’s experience influences UKA survivorship: a comparative study between all-poly and metal back designs. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(7):2074–2080

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

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.

Funding

No funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Young-Soo Shin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

For this retrospective study, ethical approval is not required.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, MK., Yoon, JR., Yang, SH. et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty fails to completely restore normal gait patterns during level walking. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26, 3280–3289 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-4863-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-4863-0

Keywords

Navigation