Significant Reduction in Short-Term Complications Following Unicompartmental Versus Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a gold standard surgical treatment for end-stage arthritis and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is an alternative for localized disease in appropriate patients. Both have been shown to have equivalent complications in the short-term period. We aimed to explore the differences in 30-day complication rates between UKA and TKA using recent data.

METHODS

Current Procedural Terminology codes identified patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database who underwent primary TKA or UKA from 2014 to 2018. Propensity score matching addressed demographic differences. Rate of any adverse event (AAE) and complications were compared.

RESULTS

We identified 279,852 patients with 270,786 and 9,066 undergoing TKA and UKA. No significant difference was observed in baseline demographics after matching. The AAE rate differed significantly between TKA (5.07%) and UKA (2.38%) cohorts (P < .001). TKA group experienced more wound dehiscence, cerebrovascular accident, postoperative blood transfusion, deep vein thrombosis, and requirement for postoperative intubation. Rate of extended length of stay differed between the TKA (11.35%) and UKA (4.89%) cohorts (P < .001). Accounting for all other variables, preoperative corticosteroid use, bleeding disorder, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease increased the risk for AAE for both groups. Increasing American Society of Anesthesiologists class also increased the odds for complication proportionally with increasing age and operative time.

CONCLUSION

Contrary to previous data, we found a significantly higher 30-day complication rate in TKA patients. TKA patients had a higher likelihood of having an extended length of stay. Multivariable analysis identified preoperative steroid use, bleeding disorder, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease as risk factors for developing adverse events for both groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.