SpringerLink
Log in

Up to twelve year follow-up of the Oxford phase three unicompartmental knee replacement in China: seven hundred and eight knees from an independent centre

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

There have been few large sample studies reporting the midterm outcome of Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) in Asian patients.

Methods

The study included 708 consecutive medial Oxford UKAs between February 2005 and May 2014 in Chinese patients. All cases were performed for the recommended indications with a minimally-invasive surgical technique. The functional and radiological outcomes were subsequently examined. In particular, we divided patients into the spontaneous osteonecrosis of the knee (SONK) group and the osteoarthritis (OA) group.

Results

All patients were reviewed with a mean follow-up of 6.2 years (range 2.7–12 years). At the latest follow up, the mean Oxford knee score (OKS) increased from 22.5 to 38.5 points, while the mean knee society score (KSS) increased from 43.6 to 86.1 points. The mean visual analogue scale pain score decreased from 7.9 to 1.5 points and the mean range of motion (ROM) increased from 112.5° to 125.2°. A total of 13 UKAs (1.88%) required revisions. The most common reason was bearing dislocation and osteoarthritis of the lateral compartment. Using revision for any cause as an endpoint, the five-year cumulative survival rate was 98.8% and the ten-year survival rate was 94.3%. There was no statistically significant difference between the SONK group and the OA group for the five-year cumulative survival rate (98.7% vs. 98.8%, P > 0.05).

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that Oxford UKA is a good option for the treatment of anteromedial OA and SONK of the knee in Asian patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Emerson RH Jr, Higgins LL (2008) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the oxford prosthesis in patients with medial compartment arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90:118–122. doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.00739

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Koskinen E, Paavolainen P, Eskelinen A, Pulkkinen P, Remes V (2007) Unicondylar knee replacement for primary osteoarthritis: a prospective follow-up study of 1819 patients from the Finnish arthroplasty register. Acta Orthop 78:128–135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kuipers BM, Kollen BJ, Bots PC, Burger BJ, van Raay JJ, Tulp NJ, Verheyen CC (2010) Factors associated with reduced early survival in the Oxford phase III medial unicompartment knee replacement. Knee 17:48–52. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2009.07.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mercier N, Wimsey S, Saragaglia D (2010) Long-term clinical results of the Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 34:1137–1143. doi:10.1007/s00264-009-0869-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lim HC, Bae JH, Song SH, Kim SJ (2012) Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement in Korean patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 94:1071–1076. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.94B8.29372

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yoshida K, Tada M, Yoshida H, Takei S, Fukuoka S, Nakamura H (2013) Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in Japan--clinical results in greater than one thousand cases over ten years. J Arthroplast 28:168–171. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2013.08.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Tu Y, Xue H, Cai M, Ma T, Liu X, **a Z (2014) Improvement of femoral component size prediction using a C-arm intensifier guide and our established algorithm in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a report from a Chinese population. Knee 21:435–438. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2013.06.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Goodfellow JW, Kershaw CJ, Benson MK, O’Connor JJ (1988) The Oxford knee for unicompartmental osteoarthritis. The first 103 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br 70:692–701

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ewald FC (1989) The knee society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:9–12

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A (1998) Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:63–69

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ahlback S (1968) Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) Suppl 277:7–72

    Google Scholar 

  12. Berend K, Berend M, Dodd C, Goodfellow J, Mauerhan D, Murray D (1999) Oxford Unicompartmental knee: manual of the surgical technique. Biomet UK Ltd, Bridgend

    Google Scholar 

  13. Pandit H, Jenkins C, Gill HS, Barker K, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2011) Minimally invasive Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement: results of 1000 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:198–204. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.93B2.25767

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Foran JR, Brown NM, Della Valle CJ, Berger RA, Galante JO (2013) Long-term survivorship and failure modes of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:102–108. doi:10.1007/s11999-012-2517-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ahlback S, Bauer GC, Bohne WH (1968) Spontaneous osteonecrosis of the knee. Arthritis Rheum 11:705–733

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Servien E, Verdonk PC, Lustig S, Paillot JL, Kara AD, Neyret P (2008) Medial unicompartimental knee arthroplasty for osteonecrosis or osteoarthritis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16:1038–1042. doi:10.1007/s00167-008-0617-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhang Q, Guo W, Liu Z, Cheng L, Yue D, Zhang N (2015) Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in treatment of osteonecrosis versus osteoarthritis: a matched-pair comparison. Acta Orthop Belg 81:333–339

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee SY, Bae JH, Kim JG, Jang KM, Shon WY, Kim KW, Lim HC (2014) The influence of surgical factors on dislocation of the meniscal bearing after Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement: a case-control study. Bone Joint J 96-B:914–922. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.96B7.33352

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dervin GF, Carruthers C, Feibel RJ, Giachino AA, Kim PR, Thurston PR (2011) Initial experience with the oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 26:192–197. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2010.02.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Price AJ, Waite JC, Svard U (2005) Long-term clinical results of the medial Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 435:171–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Laskin RS (1978) Unicompartmental tibiofemoral resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 60:182–185

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ (1998) The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:983–989

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Scott RD, Cobb AG, McQueary FG, Thornhill TS (1991) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Eight- to 12-year follow-up evaluation with survivorship analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 271:96–100

    Google Scholar 

  24. Vasso M, Del Regno C, D’Amelio A, Viggiano D, Corona K, Schiavone Panni A (2015) Minor varus alignment provides better results than neutral alignment in medial UKA. Knee 22:117–121. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2014.12.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Weale AE, Murray DW, Crawford R, Psychoyios V, Bonomo A, Howell G, O’Connor J, Goodfellow JW (1999) Does arthritis progress in the retained compartments after ‘Oxford’ medial unicompartmental arthroplasty? A clinical and radiological study with a minimum ten-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br 81:783–789

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yangpu District Central Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 450 TengYue Road, Shanghai, 200090, China

    Huaming Xue, Yihui Tu, Tong Ma, Tao Wen, Tao Yang & Minwei Cai

Authors
  1. Huaming Xue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yihui Tu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tong Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tao Wen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tao Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Minwei Cai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yihui Tu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Funding source

This study was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 81301566), Shanghai Municipal Public Health and Family Planning Commission (grant number 2013040) and Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Commission (grant number 134119b1400).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xue, H., Tu, Y., Ma, T. et al. Up to twelve year follow-up of the Oxford phase three unicompartmental knee replacement in China: seven hundred and eight knees from an independent centre. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 41, 1571–1577 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3492-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3492-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation