Advertisement

The Complications and Modes of Failure of Partial Knee Arthroplasty

  • Matthieu Ollivier
  • Matthew P. Abdel
Chapter

Abstract

Despite the excellent success rates of the modern unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), results of knee replacement registries still show a relatively high revision and failure rate for UKA. Degeneration of the unreplaced compartments and septic complications have both been reported in mobile and fixed designs. Bearing dislocation continues to be the predominant mechanism of failure in mobile UKAs, whereas polyethylene wear and aseptic loosening remain the main causes of failure in fixed UKAs. With the extensive use of contemporary designs of both mobile- and fixed-bearing UKAs, these complications will likely decrease due to the implementation of cross-linked polyethylene-bearing surfaces and improved physiologic implant kinematics.

Keywords

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty Complications Periprosthetic joint infection 

References

  1. 1.
    Foran JR, Brown NM, Della Valle CJ, Berger RA, Galante JO. Long-term survivorship and failure modes of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(1):102–8. Epub 2012/08/17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Koshino T, Sato K, Umemoto Y, Akamatsu Y, Kumagai K, Saito T. Clinical results of unicompartmental arthroplasty for knee osteoarthritis using a tibial component with screw fixation. Int Orthop. 2015;39(6):1085–91. Epub 2014/10/25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schlueter-Brust K, Kugland K, Stein G, Henckel J, Christ H, Eysel P, et al. Ten year survivorship after cemented and uncemented medial Uniglide unicompartmental knee arthroplasties. Knee. 2014;21(5):964–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vasso M, Del Regno C, Perisano C, D’Amelio A, Corona K, Schiavone PA. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is effective: ten year results. Int Orthop. 2015;39(12):2341–6. Epub 2015/07/02.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yoshida K, Tada M, Yoshida H, Takei S, Fukuoka S, Nakamura H. Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in Japan--clinical results in greater than one thousand cases over ten years. J Arthroplast. 2013;28(9 Suppl):168–71. Epub 2013/10/23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Niinimaki TT, Murray DW, Partanen J, Pajala A, Leppilahti JI. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasties implanted for osteoarthritis with partial loss of joint space have high re-operation rates. Knee. 2011;18(6):432–5. Epub 2010/11/26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim KT, Lee S, Lee JI, Kim JW. Analysis and treatment of complications after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2016;28(1):46–54. Epub 2016/03/10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Parratte S, Pauly V, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN. No long-term difference between fixed and mobile medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(1):61–8. Epub 2011/07/07.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bhattacharya R, Scott CE, Morris HE, Wade F, Nutton RW. Survivorship and patient satisfaction of a fixed bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty incorporating an all-polyethylene tibial component. Knee. 2012;19(4):348–51. Epub 2011/06/08.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sierra RJ, Kassel CA, Wetters NG, Berend KR, Della Valle CJ, Lombardi AV. Revision of unicompartmental arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty: not always a slam dunk! J Arthroplast. 2013;28(8 Suppl):128–32. Epub 2013/07/28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Clark M, Campbell DG, Kiss G, Dobson PJ, Lewis PL. Reintervention after mobile-bearing Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(2):576–80. Epub 2009/09/22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Springer BD, Scott RD, Thornhill TS. Conversion of failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;446:214–20. Epub 2006/05/05.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bergeson AG, Berend KR, Lombardi AV Jr, Hurst JM, Morris MJ, Sneller MA. Medial mobile bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: early survivorship and analysis of failures in 1000 consecutive cases. J Arthroplast. 2013;28(9 Suppl):172–5. Epub 2013/03/26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Weston-Simons JS, Pandit H, Gill HS, Jackson WF, Price AJ, Dodd CA, et al. The management of mobile bearing dislocation in the Oxford lateral unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2011;19(12):2023–6. Epub 2011/03/04.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dalury DF, Pomeroy DL, Gorab RS, Adams MJ. Why are total knee arthroplasties being revised? J Arthroplast. 2013;28(8 Suppl):120–1. Epub 2013/07/28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Argenson JN, Parratte S. The unicompartmental knee: design and technical considerations in minimizing wear. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;452:137–42. Epub 2006/08/15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vasso M, Del Regno C, D'Amelio A, Viggiano D, Corona K, Schiavone PA. Minor varus alignment provides better results than neutral alignment in medial UKA. Knee. 2015;22(2):117–21. Epub 2015/02/11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hernigou P, Pascale W, Pascale V, Homma Y, Poignard A. Does primary or secondary chondrocalcinosis influence long-term survivorship of unicompartmental arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(7):1973–9. Epub 2011/12/14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pandit H, Hamilton TW, Jenkins C, Mellon SJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW. The clinical outcome of minimally invasive phase 3 Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a 15-year follow-up of 1000 UKAs. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-b(11):1493–500. Epub 2015/11/05.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lunebourg A, Parratte S, Galland A, Lecuire F, Ollivier M, Argenson JN. Is isolated insert exchange a valuable choice for polyethylene wear in metal-backed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24(10):3280–6. Epub 2014/10/26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ten Brinke B, de Haan LJ, Koenraadt KL, van Geenen RC. Medial femoral condyle fracture as an intraoperative complication of Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24(10):3191–3. Epub 2014/12/07.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pandit H, Jenkins C, Barker K, Dodd CA, Murray DW. The Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement using a minimally-invasive approach. J Bone Joint Surg. 2006;88(1):54–60. Epub 2005/12/21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hunter DJ, Wilson DR. Role of alignment and biomechanics in osteoarthritis and implications for imaging. Radiol Clin N Am. 2009;47(4):553–66. Epub 2009/07/28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hunter DJ, Sharma L, Skaife T. Alignment and osteoarthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(Suppl 1):85–9. Epub 2009/02/21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roemhildt ML, Beynnon BD, Gauthier AE, Gardner-Morse M, Ertem F, Badger GJ. Chronic in vivo load alteration induces degenerative changes in the rat tibiofemoral joint. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2013;21(2):346–57. Epub 2012/11/06.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Scott RD. Lateral unicompartmental replacement: a road less traveled. Orthopedics. 2005;28(9):983–4. Epub 2005/09/30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Argenson JN, Parratte S, Bertani A, Flecher X, Aubaniac JM. Long-term results with a lateral unicondylar replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466(11):2686–93. Epub 2008/06/25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthieu Ollivier
    • 1
  • Matthew P. Abdel
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryInstitute for Locomotion, Aix-Marseille UniversityMarseilleFrance
  2. 2.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryMayo ClinicRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations