Revision of minimal resection resurfacing unicondylar knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty: results compared with primary total knee arthroplasty

• Published in: The Journal of arthroplasty 2013-01, Vol.28 (1), p.33-39
• Main Authors: O'Donnell, Turlough M P, Abouazza, Omar, Neil, Michael J
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Female; Hemiarthroplasty; Humans; Knee Joint - diagnostic imaging; Knee Joint - surgery; Male; Middle Aged; Prosthesis Design; Radiography; Reoperation
• ISSN: 1532-8406
• DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.02.031

We compared a cohort of patients undergoing revision of a minimal resection resurfacing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with a cohort of patients undergoing primary TKA. Both cohorts were matched in terms of age, sex, and body mass index. We collected data on preoperative and postoperative range of motion, International Knee Society scores, and radiologic data. We also collected data on the modes of failure of the primary UKA. There were 55 patients in each cohort. The average time the UKA was in place was 48.3 months. The average follow-up period from the time of revision was 39.2 months. The most common reason for revision was subsidence of the tibial base plate (58%). Forty percent of patients required particulate bone grafting for contained defects. Two patients required metal augments, and 1 required stems. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of range of motion, functional outcome, or radiologic outcomes. Revision of these types of implants to TKA is associated with similar results to primary TKA and is superior to revision of other forms of UKA.