Large variance in a lateral osteoarthritic population prior to and following lateral unicompartmental arthroplasty: An analysis of knee phenotypes.

BACKGROUND: Disagreement exists on the optimal coronal alignment target for lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). An improved understanding of the distribution of coronal alignment and joint line orientation in lateral osteoarthritis (OA) might prove beneficial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pre- and postoperative Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) distribution following lateral UKA and to evaluate the association between phenotypic variation and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). METHODS: A surgeon's registry was retrospectively reviewed between 2012 and 2022 to identify patients who received primary lateral UKA for advanced, lateral compartment OA. Radiographic measurements were performed, and CPAK phenotypes were determined. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Kujala, and patient satisfaction were analyzed at one-year and two-year follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 305 knees were included. Preoperatively, seven phenotypes were observed and CPAK3 (54.1%) was most commonly observed. Postoperatively, all nine phenotypes were observed and CPAK6 (32.8%) was predominant. Preoperatively, 23.6% did not have a prearthritic valgus alignment. No significant differences in PROMs were found between individual phenotypes or between preserved and altered phenotypes. CONCLUSION: Coronal alignment and joint line orientation were highly variable within a lateral compartment OA cohort. However, no association was demonstrated between superior postoperative PROMs and phenotype variation or phenotype preservation, which might suggest that there is not one universal optimal alignment target. Interestingly, 23.6% of knees with lateral compartment OA did not have a prearthritic valgus alignment, which may have been affected by joint line orientation.

Comparison of the early postoperative outcomes of cementless and cemented medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Aims: The primary objective of this registry-based study was to compare patient-reported outcomes of cementless and cemented medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) during the first postoperative year. The secondary objective was to assess one- and three-year implant survival of both fixation techniques. Methods: We analyzed 10,862 cementless and 7,917 cemented UKA cases enrolled in the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry, operated between 2017 and 2021. Pre- to postoperative change in outcomes at six and 12 months' follow-up were compared using mixed model analyses. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models were applied to quantify differences in implant survival. Adjustments were made for patient-specific variables and annual hospital volume. Results: Change from baseline in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and activity-related pain was comparable between groups. Adjustment for covariates demonstrated a minimally greater decrease in rest-related pain in the cemented group (ß = -0.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.16 to -0.01)). Cementless fixation was associated with a higher probability of achieving an excellent OKS outcome (> 41 points) (adjusted odds ratio 1.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.3)). The likelihood of one-year implant survival was greater for cemented implants (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.35 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.71)), with higher revision rates for periprosthetic fractures of cementless implants. During two to three years' follow-up, the likelihood of implant survival was non-significantly greater for cementless UKA (adjusted HR 0.64 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.04)), primarily due to increased revision rates for tibial loosening of cemented implants. Conclusion: Cementless and cemented medial UKA led to comparable improvement in physical function and pain reduction during the initial postoperative year, albeit with a greater likelihood of achieving excellent OKS outcomes after cementless UKA. Anticipated differences in early physical function and pain should not be a decisive factor in the choice of fixation technique. However, surgeons should consider the differences in short- and long-term implant survival when deciding which implant to use.

Robotic-arm-assisted lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty leads to high implant survival and patient satisfaction at mean 10-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of literature reporting on long-term outcomes following robotic-arm-assisted lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). This study assessed the long-term survivorship, patient-reported satisfaction and pain scores following robotic-arm-assisted lateral UKA for lateral compartment osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: A single surgeon's database was reviewed to identify all patients who underwent robotic-arm-assisted lateral UKA with a cemented, fixed-bearing prosthesis prior to May 2015. Patients were contacted to determine implant survivorship, satisfaction and pain. Kaplan-Meier models were applied to analyse survival. RESULTS: A total of 77 knees (70 patients) with a mean follow-up of 10.2 ± 1.5 years (range: 8.1-13.3) were included. Five knees were revised, corresponding to a 10-year survivorship of 96.1% and estimated survival time of 12.7 ± 0.3 years (95% confidence interval: 12.2-13.2) with all-cause revision as the endpoint. Unexplained pain (40.0%) and progression of OA (40.0%) in contralateral compartments were the most reported reasons for revision. Among patients without revision, 94.4% were either satisfied or very satisfied with their lateral UKA and the average pain score was 1.1. CONCLUSION: Robotic-arm-assisted lateral UKA led to high implant survivorship and patient satisfaction, and low pain scores at long-term follow-up. Progression of OA in contralateral compartments and unexplained pain were the most frequent reasons for revision. These findings support the continued use of robotic-arm-assisted lateral UKA for lateral compartment OA; however, its clinical value over conventional techniques remains to be established in prospective comparative studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV.

Preservation of prearthritic coronal knee phenotype and prearthritic coronal alignment yielded improved Kujala scores following ligament-guided medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of literature evaluating outcomes of the ligament-guided approach in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). An improved comprehension of the distribution of coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) phenotypes and sagittal tibial wear patterns and their associations with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and implant survivorship could provide insights into its further application in daily practice. METHODS: A registry was reviewed for patients with a minimal 2-year follow-up who underwent robotic-assisted, ligament-guided, medial UKA between 2008 and 2016. Survivorship and postoperative PROMs were collected. CPAK phenotypes and sagittal tibial wear patterns were determined. Survivorship, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Kujala and patient satisfaction were compared between phenotypes and sagittal tibial wear patterns. RESULTS: A total of 618 knees were included at a mean follow-up of 4.1 [2.0-9.6] years. Four-year conversion to the TKA survival rate was 98.9% [98.4%-99.3%] and 94.3% [93.3%-95.3%] for all-cause revision. Patients with preservation of the CPAK phenotype (84.5 ± 14.9, 81.8 ± 15.5, p = 0.033) and restoration of prearthritic coronal alignment (84.1 ± 14.9, 81.7 ± 15.9, p = 0.045) had a significantly higher Kujala score. No other significant differences in survivorship or PROMs were observed between phenotypes or sagittal tibial wear patterns. Additionally, no difference in survival rates was observed between preserved or altered phenotypes. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that preservation of CPAK phenotype and preservation of prearthritic coronal alignment yielded a significantly higher Kujala score. No other significant differences in PROMs or implant survivorship were observed, suggesting that robotic-assisted, ligament-guided medial UKA provides equal outcomes for all observed phenotypes and sagittal tibial wear patterns in medial compartment OA as long as preoperative CPAK phenotype is preserved postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

The phenotypic diversity of anteromedial osteoarthritis before and after treatment with medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A radiographic analysis of 1000 knees.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess phenotypic variation in the coronal plane of knees with anteromedial osteoarthritis using the functional knee phenotype classification, before and after treatment with medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). METHODS: The study comprised 1000 knees of 835 patients (45% females, 55% males, 90% Caucasian) who underwent medial UKA for anteromedial osteoarthritis. Pre and postoperative alignment was evaluated through the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), femoral mechanical angle (FMA), and tibial mechanical angle (TMA). Knees were classified according to the functional knee phenotype system which combines limb phenotype (HKA), and femoral and tibial knee phenotypes (FMA and TMA, respectively). Restoration of prearthritic coronal alignment following medial UKA was evaluated by phenotype. RESULTS: Preoperatively, 76 distinct and 25 relevant (prevalence ≥1%) functional knee phenotypes were identified, of which VARHKA 6°VARFMA 3°NEUTMA 0° was the most common (9.4% of knees). The most prevalent limb phenotype, VARHKA 6°, comprised 15 distinct knee phenotypes (FMA and TMA combinations). Postoperatively, 58 distinct and 17 relevant functional knee phenotypes were observed, of which VARHKA 3°NEUFMA 0°NEUTMA 0° had the highest prevalence at 18.3%. Knees with combined tibial and femoral deformities were associated with a lower probability of restoration of prearthritic coronal alignment following medial UKA, compared to knees without extra-articular deformity, or knees with an isolated tibial or femoral deformity. CONCLUSION: Phenotype analysis using the functional knee phenotype system demonstrated a wide diversity of coronal alignment phenotypes among knees with anteromedial osteoarthritis in a predominantly Caucasian population. Following medial UKA, a reduction from 25 preoperative to 17 postoperative relevant phenotypes was observed. Consideration of phenotypic variation can be of importance when aiming to restore prearthritic coronal alignment during medial UKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Restoration or relative overcorrection of pre-arthritic coronal alignment leads to improved results following medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: A pre-arthritic alignment strategy for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) aims to restore a patient's native lower limb alignment which may translate into improved outcomes. This study aimed to assess whether patients with pre-arthritically aligned knees versus patients with non-pre-arthritically aligned knees demonstrated improved mid-term outcomes and survivorship following medial UKA. The hypothesis was that pre-arthritic alignment in medial UKA would lead to better postoperative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective study of 537 robotic-assisted fixed-bearing medial UKA was conducted. During this procedure, the surgical goal was to restore pre-arthritic alignment guided by re-tensioning of the medial collateral ligament (MCL). For study purposes, coronal alignment was retrospectively evaluated using the mechanical hip-knee-ankle angle (mHKA). Pre-arthritic alignment was estimated through the arithmetic hip-knee-ankle (aHKA) algorithm. Knees were grouped according to the difference between postoperative mHKA and estimated pre-arthritic alignment (i.e., mHKA - aHKA) as Group 1 (pre-arthritically aligned: mHKA restored within 2.0° of the aHKA), Group 2 (mHKA > 2.0° overcorrected relative to the aHKA), or Group 3 (mHKA > 2.0° undercorrected relative to the aHKA). Outcomes included the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritic Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR), Kujala, proportions of knees achieving the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) for these scores, and survivorship. PASS thresholds for KOOS, JR and Kujala were determined using a receiver operating characteristic curve method. RESULTS: A total of 369 knees were categorized as Group 1, 107 as Group 2, and 61 as Group 3. At 4.4 ± 1.6 years follow-up, mean KOOS, JR was comparable among groups, while Kujala was significantly worse in Group 3. The proportion of knees achieving the PASS for Kujala (76.5 points) was lower in Group 3 (n = 32; 59%) compared to Group 1 (n = 260; 74%) (p = 0.02). 5-year survivorship was higher in Group 1 and Group 2 (99% and 100%, respectively) compared to Group 3 (91%) (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Pre-arthritically aligned knees and knees with relative overcorrection from their pre-arthritic alignment following medial UKA demonstrated improved mid-term outcomes and survivorship compared to knees with relative under correction from their pre-arthritic alignment. These results encourage restoring or relatively overcorrecting pre-arthritic alignment to optimize outcomes following medial UKA, and caution against under correction from the pre-arthritic alignment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, case series.

Ten-Year Survivorship and Patient Satisfaction Following Robotic-Arm-Assisted Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been shown to result in high short- and mid-term survivorship. However, it is not known whether these outcomes are maintained at long-term follow-up. This study aimed to evaluate long-term implant survivorship, modes of failure, and patient satisfaction following robotic-arm-assisted medial UKA. METHODS: A prospective multicenter study of 474 consecutive patients (531 knees) undergoing robotic-arm-assisted medial UKA was conducted. A cemented, fixed-bearing system with a metal-backed onlay tibial implant was used in all cases. Patients were contacted at 10-year follow-up to determine implant survivorship and satisfaction. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier models. RESULTS: Data were analyzed for 366 patients (411 knees) with a mean follow-up of 10.2 ± 0.4 years. A total of 29 revisions were reported, corresponding to a 10-year survivorship of 91.7% (95% confidence interval, 88.8% to 94.6%). Of all revisions, 26 UKAs were revised to total knee arthroplasty. Unexplained pain and aseptic loosening were the most commonly reported modes of failure, accounting for 38% and 35% of revisions, respectively. Of patients without revision, 91% were either satisfied or very satisfied with their overall knee function. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective multicenter study found high 10-year survivorship and patient satisfaction following robotic-arm-assisted medial UKA. Pain and fixation failure remained common causes for revision following cemented fixed-bearing medial UKA, despite the use of a robotic-arm-assisted technique. Prospective comparative studies are needed to assess the clinical value of robotic assistance over conventional techniques in UKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Robotic-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty restores estimated pre-arthritic coronal limb alignment: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) aims to restore pre-arthritic (constitutional) limb alignment, by re-tensioning of the medial collateral ligament (MCL). This study aimed to determine whether pre-arthritic coronal alignment was restored following robotic-assisted medial UKA in patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis. METHOD: A retrospective study was undertaken, including 102 patients with a unilateral robotic-assisted medial UKA and a contralateral unaffected knee. Both the validated arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA) and alignment of the contralateral unaffected knee were used to estimate pre-arthritic alignment. The aHKA is a radiographic method to estimate the pre-arthritic mechanical hip-knee-ankle angle (mHKA). To verify restoration of pre-arthritic alignment, postoperative mHKA was compared to the aHKA. Additionally, postoperative mHKA, joint line congruence (JLCA), and knee joint line obliquity (KJLO) angles were compared between the operative and contralateral unaffected knee. Equivalence between postoperative and pre-arthritic alignment was assessed through the two-one-sided t-test (TOST), using equivalence margins of ±2.0°. RESULTS: Postoperative mHKA was equivalent to the aHKA (mean difference -0.38°, 90% CI -0.69 to -0.07;p < .001), with 93 knees (91%) restored within 3.0° of their aHKA. Postoperative mHKA, JLCA and KJLO were equivalent between the operative and contralateral unaffected knees, with mean differences of -0.65°, -0.65°, and -0.40°, respectively; all p < .001. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative and pre-arthritic coronal alignment were equivalent following robotic-assisted medial UKA, with 91% of knees restored within 3.0° of their pre-arthritic mechanical axis. These results demonstrate that both mechanical alignment and joint line congruence are restored by MCL re-tensioning in patients undergoing robotic-assisted medial UKA for medial compartment osteoarthritis.

Successful same-day discharge in 88% of patients after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of day-case unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) by assessment of successful same-day discharge (SDD), readmission, complication and reoperation rates in the recent literature. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched to identify all eligible studies reporting outcomes of day-case UKA. Studies with intended same-day home discharge after UKA were included. A meta-analysis of proportions, using a random-effects model, was performed to estimate overall rates of successful SDD and adverse events. Subgroup analyses were performed for studies including selected patients (i.e., patients had to meet certain patient-specific criteria to be eligible for day-case UKA) and unselected patients (i.e., no additional criteria for day-case UKA), as well as for clinical and registry-based studies. Additional outcomes included reasons for the failure of SDD and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 29 studies and 9694 patients were included with a mean age of 66 ± 9 years and mean follow-up of 59 days (mean range 30-270 days). Based on 24 studies (2733 patients), the overall successful SDD rate was 88% (95% confidence interval [CI] 80-92). These rates were 91% (95% CI 84-95) across studies with selected patients and 76% (95% CI 55-89) across studies with unselected patients. Overall readmission, complication and reoperation rates were 3% (95% CI 1.9-4.4), 4% (95% CI 2.8-5.2) and 1% (95% CI 0.8-1.3), respectively. Inability to mobilize, nausea and uncontrolled pain were frequently reported reasons for failed SDD. The overall patient satisfaction rate was 94%. CONCLUSION: This systematic review with meta-analysis found an overall successful SDD rate of 88% after UKA in a heterogeneous cohort of selected and unselected patients. Readmission, complication and reoperation rates suggest UKA can be performed safely and effectively as a same-day discharge procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of level III and IV studies.

Robotic-Arm-Assisted Lateral Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty with a Fixed-Bearing Implant.

Background: Approximately 5% to 10% of patients with knee arthritis have isolated lateral compartment arthritis; however, lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) comprises just 1% of all knee arthroplasties1. This low proportion is partly because of the perceived complexity of lateral UKA and concerns over implant longevity and survivorship compared with total knee arthroplasty (TKA)2,3. With an improved understanding of knee kinematics alongside advances in implant design and tools to aid in appropriate restoration of limb alignment, lateral UKA can be an appealing surgical alternative to TKA for certain patients with lateral knee arthritis4,5. In appropriately selected patients, lateral UKA has been associated with reduced osseous and soft-tissue resection, more natural knee kinematics, less pain, shorter hospitalization, decreased blood loss and infection rates, and excellent survivorship and patient-reported outcomes6-9. Description: This surgical approach and technique described for lateral UKA utilizes robotic-arm assistance and modern fixed-bearing implants10. The specific steps involve appropriate patient evaluation and selection, extensive radiographic and computed-tomography-based preoperative templating, a lateral parapatellar approach, intraoperative confirmation of component position and alignment, and robotic-arm assistance to perform osseous resections to achieve limb alignment and kinematic targets10. Final implants are cemented in place, and patients typically are discharged home on the day of surgery10. Alternatives: Nonoperative treatment for end-stage knee arthritis includes weight loss, activity modification, assistive devices, bracing, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications, and various injections11. Alternative surgical treatments include TKA4 and, in certain patients, an offloading periarticular osteotomy12. Rationale: Lateral UKA is an appealing surgical option for nonobese patients who have disabling knee pain isolated to the lateral compartment, good preoperative range of motion, and a passively correctable valgus limb deformity10,13. Expected Outcomes: Patients are typically discharged home on the day of surgery, or occasionally on postoperative day 1 if medical comorbidities dictate hospital monitoring overnight10. Patients return to light activities, including walking, immediately postoperatively. By 3 months postoperatively, patients will generally have returned to all desired activities9. The mid-term outcomes of this procedure, as performed by the corresponding author, have been published recently14,15. The 5-year survivorship of 171 lateral UKAs was 97.7%, with 72.8% of patients reporting that they were very satisfied with their procedure and 19.8%, that they were satisfied14. Only 3.8% of patients reported dissatisfaction with their lateral UKA14. The mean Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and standard deviation were 85.6 ± 14.314. These outcomes did not differ from those observed in 802 medial UKAs, which showed a survivorship of 97.8% and KOOS of 84.3 ± 15.914. These findings are generally in line with previously published studies, which have demonstrated excellent survivorship and patient-reported outcomes with fixed-bearing lateral UKA16-19. Important Tips: Component position and alignment are critical to achieve target knee kinematics.Target postoperative alignment is 1° to 4° of valgus.A meticulous cementation technique is required for optimal fixation and avoidance of excess residual cement in the posterior knee. Acronyms and Abbreviations: ACL = anterior cruciate ligamentAP = anteroposteriorBMI = body mass indexCT = computed tomographyCAT = computed axial tomographyIT = iliotibialKOOS JR = Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint ReplacementMCL = medial collateral ligamentMRI = magnetic resonance imagingOR = operating roomPFJ = patellofemoral jointpoly = polyethyleneROM = range of motionTKA = total knee arthroplastyUKA = unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Clinical Improvement Is Achieved Following Tibial Tubercle Distomedialization for Patellar Maltracking and Patella Alta Without Instability.

PURPOSE: To determine short-term patient-reported outcomes following distomedial tibial tubercle transfer (TTT) in patients with patellar maltracking and patella alta without instability. METHODS: A single-surgeon case series study was performed on patients receiving distomedial TTT for the indication of patellar maltracking and patella alta without instability, after nonresponse to conservative treatment. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed preoperatively and at 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up using Kujala, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores. Generalized estimating equations analyses were performed to study improvement over time. Minimal clinically important differences obtained from literature were used to determine clinical relevance. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were included. Eight patients were lost to follow-up; thus, outcomes of 32 patients were analyzed. Mean follow-up was 22 months, median age was 21 years, and 75% were female. Mean Kujala score increased pre- to postoperatively from 55 ± 12 to 79 ± 16 (P < .001), KOOS from 48 ± 14 to 79 ± 15 (P < .001), and VAS from 64 ± 17 to 25 ± 21 (P < .001), respectively. Eighty-four percent had clinical improvement of Kujala score, 91% of KOOS, and 78% of VAS score. A plateau phase in pain reduction was reached at 3 months, and in functional improvement at 6 months follow-up, after which no further significant improvement was observed. Complication rate was 3% and removal of hardware rate was 72%. Conclusions: In this case series study, distomedial TTT led to clinically relevant functional improvement and pain reduction in patients with patellar maltracking and patella alta without instability. However, the removal of hardware rate was high (72%). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.