Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mobile-Bearing Unis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
ESSKA Instructional Course Lecture Book

  • 1365 Accesses

Abstract

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has many advantages over total knee arthroplasty (TKA) [1–3] including better function, a better feel, better range of motion, higher patient satisfaction, less blood loss, lower infection rate, lower morbidity and even lower mortality [4–6]. Therefore, for many surgeons, UKA is option number one in the treatment of unicompartmental medial or lateral knee arthritis [7].

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Beard DJ, Davies LJ, Cook JA, MacLennan G, Price A, Kent S, et al. The clinical and cost-effectiveness of total versus partial knee replacement in patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis (TOPKAT): 5-year outcomes of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2019;394:746–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Murray DW, Liddle AD, Dodd CA, Pandit H. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: is the glass half full or half empty? Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B:3–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Walker T, Gotterbarm T, Bruckner T, Merle C, Streit MR. Total versus unicompartmental knee replacement for isolated lateral osteoarthritis: a matched-pairs study. Int Orthop. 2014;38:2259–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Liddle AD, Judge A, Pandit H, Murray DW. Adverse outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee replacement in 101,330 matched patients: a study of data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Lancet. 2014;384:1437–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Liddle AD, Pandit H, Judge A, Murray DW. Optimal usage of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a study of 41,986 cases from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B:1506–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Liddle AD, Pandit H, Judge A, Murray DW. Patient-reported outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a study of 14,076 matched patients from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B:793–801.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Aldinger PR, Clarius M, Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, Breusch SJ. Medial unicompartmental knee replacement using the “Oxford Uni” meniscal bearing knee. Orthopade. 2004;33:1277–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Berend KR, Berend ME, Dalury DF, Argenson JN, Dodd CA, Scott RD. Consensus statement on indications and contraindications for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Surg Orthop Adv. 2015;24:252–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Biau DJ, Greidanus NV, Garbuz DS, Masri BA. No difference in quality-of-life outcomes after mobile and fixed-bearing medial unicompartmental knee replacement. J Arthroplast. 2013;28:220–226.e221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Catani F, Benedetti MG, Bianchi L, Marchionni V, Giannini S, Leardini A. 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. 2012;20:1042–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Neufeld ME, Albers A, Greidanus NV, Garbuz DS, Masri BA. A comparison of mobile and fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum 10-year follow-up. J Arthroplast. 2018;33:1713–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Whittaker JP, Naudie DD, McAuley JP, McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ, Bourne RB. Does bearing design influence midterm survivorship of unicompartmental arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:73–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ko YB, Gujarathi MR, Oh KJ. Outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of comparative studies between fixed and mobile bearings focusing on complications. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2015;27:141–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Smith TO, Hing CB, Davies L, Donell ST. Fixed versus mobile bearing unicompartmental knee replacement: a meta-analysis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2009;95:599–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Parratte S, Pauly V, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN. No long-term difference between fixed and mobile medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:61–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kuyucu E, Bulbul AM, Kara A, Say F, Erdil M. Which unicondylar prosthesis is better in the mid-term in obese patients: fixed or mobile? Acta Orthop Belg. 2018;84:257–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cao Z, Niu C, Gong C, Sun Y, Xie J, Song Y. Comparison of fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2019;34(12):3114–3123.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.07.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Peersman G, Stuyts B, Vandenlangenbergh T, Cartier P, Fennema P. Fixed-versus mobile-bearing UKA: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23:3296–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cheng T, Chen D, Zhu C, Pan X, Mao X, Guo Y, et al. Fixed-versus mobile-bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: are failure modes different? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21:2433–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bonutti PM, Dethmers DA. Contemporary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: fixed vs mobile bearing. J Arthroplast. 2008;23:24–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Goodfellow J, O’Connor J, Dodd C, Murray DW, editors. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the Oxford knee. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Schlueter-Brust K, Kugland K, Stein G, Henckel J, Christ H, Eysel P, et al. Ten year survivorship after cemented and uncemented medial Uniglide(R) unicompartmental knee arthroplasties. Knee. 2014;21:964–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Bottomley N, Jones LD, Rout R, Alvand A, Rombach I, Evans T, et al. A survival analysis of 1084 knees of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a comparison between consultant and trainee surgeons. Bone Joint J. 2016;98-B:22–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. 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:1493–500.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lim HC, Bae JH, Song SH, Kim SJ. Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement in Korean patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94:1071–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 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;28:168–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Faour-Martin O, Valverde-Garcia JA, Martin-Ferrero MA, Vega-Castrillo A, de la Red Gallego MA, Suarez de Puga CC, et al. Oxford phase 3 unicondylar knee arthroplasty through a minimally invasive approach: long-term results. Int Orthop. 2013;37:833–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Price AJ, Svard U. A second decade lifetable survival analysis of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:174–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Argenson JN, O’Connor JJ. Polyethylene wear in meniscal knee replacement. A one to nine-year retrieval analysis of the Oxford knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992;74:228–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Psychoyios V, Crawford RW, O'Connor JJ, Murray DW. Wear of congruent meniscal bearings in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a retrieval study of 16 specimens. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:976–82.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Price AJ. Medial meniscal bearing unicompartmental arthroplasty: wear, mechanics and clinical outcome. DPhil Thesis, University of Oxford; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Price AJ, Short A, Kellett C, Beard D, Gill H, Pandit H, et al. Ten-year in vivo wear measurement of a fully congruent mobile bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87:1493–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Bae JH, Kim JG, Lee SY, Lim HC, In Y, Group MS. Epidemiology of bearing dislocations after mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: multicenter analysis of 67 bearing dislocations. J Arthroplasty. 2020;35(1):265–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.08.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Mohammad HR, Strickland L, Hamilton TW, Murray DW. Long-term outcomes of over 8,000 medial Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knees-a systematic review. Acta Orthop. 2018;89:101–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Pandit H, Jenkins C, Gill HS, Barker K, Dodd CA, Murray DW. Minimally invasive Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement: results of 1000 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:198–204.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Walker T, Aldinger PR, Streit MR, Gotterbarm T. Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty—a challenge. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2017;29:17–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Weston-Simons JS, Kendrick BJ, Mentink MJ, Pandit H, Gill HS, Murray DW. An analysis of dislocation of the domed Oxford lateral unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee. 2014;21:304–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Streit MR, Walker T, Bruckner T, Merle C, Kretzer JP, Clarius M, et al. Mobile-bearing lateral unicompartmental knee replacement with the Oxford domed tibial component: an independent series. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94:1356–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. 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;19:2023–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Weston-Simons JS, Pandit H, Kendrick BJ, Jenkins C, Barker K, Dodd CA, et al. The mid-term outcomes of the Oxford domed lateral unicompartmental knee replacement. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B:59–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Walker T, Zahn N, Bruckner T, Streit MR, Mohr G, Aldinger PR, et al. Mid-term results of lateral unicondylar mobile bearing knee arthroplasty: a multicentre study of 363 cases. Bone Joint J. 2018;100-B:42–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Hernigou P, Deschamps G. Patellar impingement following unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:1132–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Berger RA, Meneghini RM, Sheinkop MB, Della Valle CJ, Jacobs JJ, Rosenberg AG, et al. (2004) The progression of patellofemoral arthrosis after medial unicompartmental replacement: results at 11 to 15 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res; https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000147700.89433.a592-99.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Vulpius Klinik GmbH, Bad Rappenau, Germany

    M. Clarius & L. M. Clarius

Authors
  1. M. Clarius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. M. Clarius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Clarius .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Kantonsspital Baselland (Bruderholz, Liestal, Laufen), Bruderholz, Basel Land, Switzerland

    Michael Tobias Hirschmann

  2. Center of Functional and Biological Reconstruction of the Knee, Humanitas University, Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy

    Elizaveta Kon

  3. Department of Orthopaedics, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Kristian Samuelsson

  4. Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milano, Italy

    Matteo Denti

  5. Department of Orthopaedics, Lyon Ortho Clinic, LYON, France

    David Dejour

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 ESSKA

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Clarius, M., Clarius, L.M. (2020). Mobile-Bearing Unis. In: Hirschmann, M., Kon, E., Samuelsson, K., Denti, M., Dejour, D. (eds) ESSKA Instructional Course Lecture Book . Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-61264-4_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-61264-4_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-61263-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-61264-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation