html5-img
1 / 32

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Principles and Results. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Brian Le, PGY-1 January 19, 2012. Outline. Brief overview of knee biomechanics Rationale, benefits, Indications of UKA Some basic principles The Oxford UKA as a prototype Other principles Results. Knee biomechanics.

thomas-buckley
Télécharger la présentation

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Principles and Results Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty Brian Le, PGY-1 January 19, 2012

  2. Outline • Brief overview of knee biomechanics • Rationale, benefits, Indications of UKA • Some basic principles • The Oxford UKA as a prototype • Other principles • Results

  3. Knee biomechanics • Knee motion is more than flexion/extension • Femur “rolls back” on tibia on flexion • IR of tibia on the femur during flexion, ER during extension • Lateral femoral condyle translates posteriorly more than medial femoral condyle during flexion • Essentially pivoting about a medial base • Also ~10o abduction/adduction during gait cycle

  4. Rationale • TKA results are very good, so why bother? • 94% to >98% 15-year survival of TKAs in some studies • Australian registry data 2010 shown below TKA UKA

  5. Rationale (2) • Young patients: • 76% TKA survival at 10 years for age <60 years • Rand et al. JBJS 73-A(3), 1991 • May choose better function and lower morbidity of UKA over longevity of TKA • Can delay TKA TKA

  6. Benefits of UKA • Faster recovery • Fewer short term complications • Less invasive vs osteotomy/TKA • Spares other compartments and ligaments—preserved knee kinematics • Preserved proprioceptive function of cruciates—feels more normal • Can be simple revision to TKA

  7. Debatable Isolated single compartment involvement Pain localized to affected compartment Postponing a TKA in younger population Inflammatory arthritis Flexion contracture >15o Pre-op ROM less than 90o >10o varus from mech. axis >5o valgus from mech. axis Significant OA of other compartments ACL deficiency—relative Can be reconstructed ? obesity Indications Contraindications

  8. Basic principles • Since other compartments and ligaments are preserved, UKA is a true “resurfacing” procedure • Thus, the UKA must be anatomic to preserve normal knee motion—this is not feasible/possible • Need to find ways around this

  9. The Oxford UKA: a prototype • Designed by Goodfellow and O’Connor, first used as UKA in 1982 • spherical metal femoral component • Unconstrained fully congruent polyethylene bearing • Flat tibial base plate

  10. Oxford principles From Goodfellow and O’Connor, JBJS (Br) 60-B (3): 358, 1978 • The components should be shaped to allow distracting, sliding, and rolling movements between the bones • The components should apply only compressive stress to the juxta-articular bone • All surviving soft tissues should be kept and restored to their natural tensions • The areas of contact between the prosthetic surfaces should be large enough to maintain the pressure under load at a level which the prosthetic materials can withstand

  11. Other principles • Tibial component: larger, onlay instead of inlay designreduced subsidence and surrounding cortex # • Ligament instability, esp ACL, leads to early failure • Minimal bone resectionsimpler future revisions

  12. Tibial component • All-poly tibial components: subject to creep/cold flow resulting in breaking at bone-cement interface and loosening • Metal-backed components introduced to attempt avoiding this

  13. Constraint • Property of implant design • effect of stabilization in a deficient soft-tissue envelope •  constraint,  aseptic loosening of tibial component •  constraint,  force dissipation through ligaments but excess delamination and wear of poly More constraint Less constraint

  14. Mobile bearings • Poly slides on flat metal tibial tray • Decreases shear stresses on tibial component • Thus the Oxford 2nd principle; The components should apply only compressive stress to the juxta-articular bone

  15. Fixed vs Mobile bearings • Round on flat/slight dish, unconstrained movement • Can be all-poly or metal backed tibial components • More poly wearthicker poly needed • More contact stress • Congruent surfaces minimizing point loading • Necessarily metal-backed •  poly wear allows thinner poly, thus less bony resection • Less contact stress Fixed Bearing Mobile bearing

  16. Fixed bearing devices • Several models • Stryker PKR used here • Single radius design from 10-110 degrees of flexion • To simplify gap balancing

  17. Results

  18. Survivorship • Berger et al. JBJS (Am) 87(5): 999-1006, 2005 (duplicate data) • 98% 10 yr survival • 96% 13 yr survival • Endpoint=revision or radiographic loosening Adapted from Jamali et al. Am J Orthop 38(1):17-23, 2009.

  19. Revision rate 5% cumulative revision rate at 3 years Endpoint=any revision surgery Labek et al, JBJS (Br), 93-B(3): 293-297, 2011.

  20. Swedish Registry 2011 Report

  21. Surgeon experience • More UKA’s performed by a centreincreased success rates • Management standards • Surgical technique • Proper Indications • Robertsson et al., JBJS (Br) 83(1): 45-49, 2001.

  22. Fixed vs Mobile bearing • Mobile bearings: lower poly wear (Ashraf et al. 2004 and Psychoyios et al. 1998) • Whittaker et al. CORR 468:73-81, 2010 • Retrospective comparative study • Fixed bearing: earlier revisions for OA progression • Mobile bearing: earlier aseptic loosening—technique related? • Smith et al. Ort Tra Surg Res 95:599-605, 2009 • Meta-analysis of 5 studies • No significant difference in aseptic loosening, pain, OA progression, tib plateau fracture, subsidence, revision • Limitations: poor randomization details, low sample size, poor concealment…

  23. All-poly vs metal-backed • Equivocal results: Hyldahl et al., J Arthroplasty, 16(2):174–9, 2001 • No difference in clinical results (Hospital for Special Surgery Score) or migration of tibial component at 2 years • Other studies?

  24. UKA vs TKA: RCT UKA (St Georg Sled) TKA Prospective RCT with 15 year f/u Enrolled 52 UKA and 50 TKR Not significantly different Newman et al., JBJS (Br) 91-B(1): 52-57, 2009.

  25. UKA vs TKA: pain and function Survey study based on Norwegian registry patients Scored from 0-100 Small or no difference between UKA and TKA, no clinical significance Lygre et al., JBJS (Am) 92-A(18): 2890-7, 2010.

  26. UKA vs TKA: revision rate Labek et al, JBJS (Br), 93-B(3): 293-297, 2011. Goodfellow and O’Connor: cannot compare revision rates of UKA and TKA—relationship between clinical failure and revision rate is different for each.JBJS (Br) 92(12): 1628-31, 2010.

  27. UKA revised to TKA • Lai and Rand, CORR 287: 193-201, 1993. • 81% good/excellent results at 5.4 years • Levine et al., J Arthroplasty, 11(7): 797-801, 1996 • Comparable to primary TKA, superior to revision TKA

  28. UKA revised to TKA (2) • Ottawa Data

  29. UKA vs HTO Dettoni et al., Iowa Ort J, 30:131-40, 2010.

  30. Lateral compartment UKA • 10 times less frequently performed Retrospective case series, therapeutic level IV Heyse et al. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130:1539-1548, 2010

  31. Take-home messages • UKA is a good treatment option in carefully selected patients • Surgeon experience plays a role • Outcomes are excellent, comparable to TKA • UKA is an excellent alternative to HTO • UKA can delay TKA • Ongoing debate between fixed vs mobile bearings • More research needed for lateral compartment UKAs

  32. Credits • Dr. Dervin • Marie-France Rancourt • Previous presentations • Luke Gauthier • Natasha Holder • Others…

More Related