Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California.
Adventist Health Lodi Memorial Hospital, Lodi, California.
J Knee Surg. 2021 Mar;34(4):406-414. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1696734. Epub 2019 Sep 9.
Revision of a medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to a mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (MA TKA) is inferior to a primary TKA; however, revision with kinematic alignment (KA) has not been well studied. The present study determined whether patients revised with KA had a higher use of revision components, different postoperative alignment, and different clinical outcome scores from patients with a primary KA TKA. From 2006 to 2017, all patients suitable for a revision of a failed medial UKA to a TKA and a primary TKA were treated with KA. Reasons for the revision performed in ten females and six males at a mean age 67 ± 8 years included progression of osteoarthritis in the lateral hemi-joint ( = 6), aseptic loosening ( = 4), unremitting medial pain without loosening ( = 4), and insert wear ( = 2). Patients with a revision were matched 1:3 with a control cohort treated with a primary KA TKA. Revisions were performed with primary components without augments, stem extensions, or bone grafts. Seven postoperative alignment parameters of the limb and components were comparable to the control cohort ( > 0.05). At a mean follow-up of 5 years (1-10), implant survival was 100%, and the revision/primary group clinical outcome scores were 39/43 points for the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), 2.2/1.0 cm for the Visual Analog Pain Score, and 12/7 points for the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score. When compared with primary KA TKA, surgeons that revise a failed medial UKA to a TKA with use of KA can expect similar operative complexity, comparable postoperative alignments, and a mean OKS of 39 points, which is higher than the mean 27 to 30 point range reported for revision of a failed UKA to a TKA with the use of MA.
对内侧单间室膝关节置换术(UKA)的翻修改为机械对线全膝关节置换术(MA TKA)不如初次 TKA;然而,使用运动对线(KA)进行翻修尚未得到很好的研究。本研究旨在确定使用 KA 进行翻修的患者是否比初次 KA TKA 患者使用更多的翻修组件、术后对线不同以及临床结果评分不同。
从 2006 年到 2017 年,所有适合对内侧 UKA 失败翻修为 TKA 和初次 TKA 的患者均采用 KA 进行治疗。10 名女性和 6 名男性患者平均年龄 67±8 岁,翻修的原因包括外侧半关节骨关节炎进展( = 6)、无菌性松动( = 4)、无松动的持续内侧疼痛( = 4)和插入物磨损( = 2)。与初次 KA TKA 治疗的对照组相比,翻修组患者匹配 1:3。翻修采用无补片、延长杆或植骨的初次组件进行。肢体和组件的 7 个术后对线参数与对照组相当( > 0.05)。
在平均 5 年(1-10 年)的随访中,植入物存活率为 100%,翻修/初次组的牛津膝关节评分(OKS)为 39/43 分,视觉模拟疼痛评分为 2.2/1.0 cm,西部安大略省和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数评分为 12/7 分。与初次 KA TKA 相比,对内侧 UKA 失败的患者进行翻修,采用 KA 进行 TKA 的外科医生可以预期手术复杂性相似、术后对线相似,平均 OKS 为 39 分,高于初次 KA TKA 对失败 UKA 翻修的 27 至 30 分的平均范围。