One hundred forty-nine medial prostheses were implanted in 140 patients between 1988 and 1996. After a mean of 67 months 28 patients had died, without the need for revision. Seventeen prostheses were lost to follow-up. Revision surgery using a total knee prosthesis was performed in 16 cases. In four others, a lateral prosthesis was implanted subsequently to a medial one. One of these four was revised to a total knee prosthesis 6 years later. In another four cases, late complications of the meniscal bearing were treated with replacement of this bearing. The surviving prostheses were seen back after a mean of 126 months. The cumulative survival rate at 10 years was 82% for the whole population and 84% when knees with a previous high tibial osteotomy were excluded. Since these results compare poorly to the survival of total knee arthroplasty, this prosthesis is not the first-choice implant. Because it preserves a maximum of bone stock and is revised to a total prosthesis almost without difficulty, it is the first-choice implant for medial unicompartmental osteoarthritis in patients younger than 65. Further research is mandatory to confirm that this prosthesis very rarely needs revision in patients older than 75. It should not be used in osteotomized knees.
Our medium- and long-term results obtained with the Oxford unicompartmental knee prosthesis for unicompartmental knee osteoarthrosis are presented. Ninety-seven prostheses were evaluated (87 medial, 10 lateral) in 86 patients, with the Hospital for Special Surgery knee score after 2-14 years (mean follow-up: 6 years 9 months). Five prostheses were lost to follow-up. Eight patients died, not related to surgery; none had undergone a revision. Fourteen revisions (of which one bilateral UKP), 11 medial and three lateral, were performed. The mean HSS score of the 69 UKPs was 178.8 (80% excellent, 10% good, 4% fair, 6% poor). These findings confirm the good results reported in other studies, regarding proper patient selection and a consistent operative technique.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.