13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Bicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (BKA) in comparison to unicompartmental (UKA), Patellofemoral (PFA) ans total knee arthroplasty (TKA) – Early Clinical Results

      abstract
      , MD 1 , , MD 1 , , MD 1 , , Ing 1
      Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
      SAGE Publications

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims and Objectives: The purpose was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients with knee osteoarthritis treated with bicompartmental arthroplasty (BKA) in comparison to unicompartmental (UKA), patellofemoral (PFA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in a single center. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective study analyzing a consecutive series of 396 patients from two surgeons in a single center. In 191 men and 205 women either partial or total knee replacement were performed. Their mean age at surgery was 63±6,85 years and mean BMI 29,55±5,00 kg/m2. In 238 patients UKA, in 125 TKA, in 21 PFA and in 11 patients BKA was performed. Implants were cemented and made of cobalt chrome in partial knee and zirconium oxide in total knee replacement. Demographics and patient reported outcomes (VAS, KOOS, Oxford Knee Score (OKS)) were collected preoperatively and 3,6 and 12 months postoperatively. A total of 202 patients have thus far completed the 12 months follow-up time point. Results: All mean KOOS and OKS scores improved significantly 1 year after surgery (p<0.05). Mean preoperative aggregated KOOS improved from 49,0±14,1 to 74,3±17,8 in UKA, from 44,1±12,9 to 67,5±9,4 in PFA, from 46,1±15,1 to 71,0±14,8 in TKA and from 45,7±13,8 to 72,6±9,7 in BKA (p<0.05). Mean preoperative aggregated OKS improved from 25,1±7,6) to 38,5±9,7 in UKA, from 23,0±7,6 to 36,8±3,8 in PFA, from 23,4±8,2 to 37,3±8,1 in TKA and from 22,9±9,6 to 37,0±1,5 in BKA (p<0.05). The mean pain level (VAS)decreased from pre-treatment to 12 months after surgery in UKA from 5,5 to 1,6, in PFA from 6,1 to 2,5, in TKA from 6,0 to 1,9 and in BKA from 6,6 to 2,6. One patient (0.4%) underwent revision (at 3 month for inlay dislocation). Conclusion: This study shows excellent early clinical results of patients treated with unicompartmental, bicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty. Adherence to strict indications lead to a significant improvement of patient reported outcomes and a low revision rate one year postoperatively. The reported results for BKA are comparable to those of patients treated with unicompartmental arthroplasty. We conclude that bicompartmental arthroplasty is a safe and reliable surgery for patients with bicompartmental osteoarthritis.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Orthop J Sports Med
          Orthop J Sports Med
          OJS
          spojs
          Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
          SAGE Publications (Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA )
          2325-9671
          26 June 2019
          June 2019
          : 7
          : 6 suppl4 , 2018 DKG Annual Meeting Abstracts
          : 2325967119S00234
          Affiliations
          [1 ] OrthoCentrum Hamburg, Park-Klinik-Manhagen, Hamburg, Germany
          Article
          10.1177_2325967119S00234
          10.1177/2325967119S00234
          6598121
          d3fc31f7-c431-4c5c-a1f6-1ba72cb882c7
          © The Author(s) 2019

          This open-access article is published and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - No Derivatives License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits the noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction of the article in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this article without the permission of the Author(s). For article reuse guidelines, please visit SAGE’s website at http://www.sagepub.com/journals-permissions.

          History
          Categories
          Article
          Custom metadata
          corrected-proof

          Comments

          Comment on this article