Clinical outcome of bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for both medial and lateral femorotibial arthritis: a systematic review—is there proof of concept?

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Clinical outcome of bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for both medial and lateral femorotibial arthritis : a systematic review—is there proof of concept? / Wada, Keizo; Price, Andrew; Gromov, Kirill; Lustig, Sebastien; Troelsen, Anders.

In: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Vol. 140, No. 10, 2020, p. 1503-1513.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Wada, K, Price, A, Gromov, K, Lustig, S & Troelsen, A 2020, 'Clinical outcome of bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for both medial and lateral femorotibial arthritis: a systematic review—is there proof of concept?', Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, vol. 140, no. 10, pp. 1503-1513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03492-6

APA

Wada, K., Price, A., Gromov, K., Lustig, S., & Troelsen, A. (2020). Clinical outcome of bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for both medial and lateral femorotibial arthritis: a systematic review—is there proof of concept? Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 140(10), 1503-1513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03492-6

Vancouver

Wada K, Price A, Gromov K, Lustig S, Troelsen A. Clinical outcome of bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for both medial and lateral femorotibial arthritis: a systematic review—is there proof of concept? Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery. 2020;140(10):1503-1513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03492-6

Author

Wada, Keizo ; Price, Andrew ; Gromov, Kirill ; Lustig, Sebastien ; Troelsen, Anders. / Clinical outcome of bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for both medial and lateral femorotibial arthritis : a systematic review—is there proof of concept?. In: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery. 2020 ; Vol. 140, No. 10. pp. 1503-1513.

Bibtex

@article{33ec1c24d8ce4f19b07b72f02f21335f,
title = "Clinical outcome of bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for both medial and lateral femorotibial arthritis: a systematic review—is there proof of concept?",
abstract = "Introduction: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a well-accepted treatment for isolated unicompartmental osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. In previous literature, it has been suggested that bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) which uses two UKA implants in both the medial and lateral compartments of the same knee is a feasible and viable option for the treatment of knee OA. Given the advantages of UKA treatment, it is warranted to review the literature of bi-UKA and discuss the evidence in terms of implant selection, indications, surgical techniques, and outcomes, respectively. Materials and methods: Following the PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies presenting outcome of bi-UKA. Studies were included if they reported clinical outcomes using two unicompartmental prostheses for both medial and lateral femorotibial arthritis. Studies with the addition of patellofemoral arthroplasty or concomitant soft-tissue reconstruction and those not published in English were excluded. Results: In the early literature, the procedure of bi-UKA were performed for very severe OA and rheumatoid arthritis, but indications have evolved to reflect a more contemporary case-mix of knee OA patients. Both mobile and fixed bearing implants have been used, with the latter being the most frequent choice. A medial parapatellar approach for incision and arthrotomy has been the most frequently used technique. The present review found a promising clinical outcome of both simultaneous and staged bi-UKA although the number of long-term follow-up studies was limited. Conclusions: Both simultaneous and staged bi-UKA has demonstrated good functional outcomes. However, the volume and level of evidence in general is low for studies captured in this review, and the data on long-term outcomes remain limited. The present review indicates that bi-UKA is a feasible and viable surgical option for bicompartmental femorotibial OA in carefully selected patients.",
keywords = "Arthroplasty, Bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, Knee, Osteoarthritis, Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty",
author = "Keizo Wada and Andrew Price and Kirill Gromov and Sebastien Lustig and Anders Troelsen",
year = "2020",
doi = "10.1007/s00402-020-03492-6",
language = "English",
volume = "140",
pages = "1503--1513",
journal = "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery",
issn = "0936-8051",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "10",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical outcome of bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for both medial and lateral femorotibial arthritis

T2 - a systematic review—is there proof of concept?

AU - Wada, Keizo

AU - Price, Andrew

AU - Gromov, Kirill

AU - Lustig, Sebastien

AU - Troelsen, Anders

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - Introduction: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a well-accepted treatment for isolated unicompartmental osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. In previous literature, it has been suggested that bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) which uses two UKA implants in both the medial and lateral compartments of the same knee is a feasible and viable option for the treatment of knee OA. Given the advantages of UKA treatment, it is warranted to review the literature of bi-UKA and discuss the evidence in terms of implant selection, indications, surgical techniques, and outcomes, respectively. Materials and methods: Following the PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies presenting outcome of bi-UKA. Studies were included if they reported clinical outcomes using two unicompartmental prostheses for both medial and lateral femorotibial arthritis. Studies with the addition of patellofemoral arthroplasty or concomitant soft-tissue reconstruction and those not published in English were excluded. Results: In the early literature, the procedure of bi-UKA were performed for very severe OA and rheumatoid arthritis, but indications have evolved to reflect a more contemporary case-mix of knee OA patients. Both mobile and fixed bearing implants have been used, with the latter being the most frequent choice. A medial parapatellar approach for incision and arthrotomy has been the most frequently used technique. The present review found a promising clinical outcome of both simultaneous and staged bi-UKA although the number of long-term follow-up studies was limited. Conclusions: Both simultaneous and staged bi-UKA has demonstrated good functional outcomes. However, the volume and level of evidence in general is low for studies captured in this review, and the data on long-term outcomes remain limited. The present review indicates that bi-UKA is a feasible and viable surgical option for bicompartmental femorotibial OA in carefully selected patients.

AB - Introduction: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a well-accepted treatment for isolated unicompartmental osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. In previous literature, it has been suggested that bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) which uses two UKA implants in both the medial and lateral compartments of the same knee is a feasible and viable option for the treatment of knee OA. Given the advantages of UKA treatment, it is warranted to review the literature of bi-UKA and discuss the evidence in terms of implant selection, indications, surgical techniques, and outcomes, respectively. Materials and methods: Following the PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies presenting outcome of bi-UKA. Studies were included if they reported clinical outcomes using two unicompartmental prostheses for both medial and lateral femorotibial arthritis. Studies with the addition of patellofemoral arthroplasty or concomitant soft-tissue reconstruction and those not published in English were excluded. Results: In the early literature, the procedure of bi-UKA were performed for very severe OA and rheumatoid arthritis, but indications have evolved to reflect a more contemporary case-mix of knee OA patients. Both mobile and fixed bearing implants have been used, with the latter being the most frequent choice. A medial parapatellar approach for incision and arthrotomy has been the most frequently used technique. The present review found a promising clinical outcome of both simultaneous and staged bi-UKA although the number of long-term follow-up studies was limited. Conclusions: Both simultaneous and staged bi-UKA has demonstrated good functional outcomes. However, the volume and level of evidence in general is low for studies captured in this review, and the data on long-term outcomes remain limited. The present review indicates that bi-UKA is a feasible and viable surgical option for bicompartmental femorotibial OA in carefully selected patients.

KW - Arthroplasty

KW - Bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

KW - Knee

KW - Osteoarthritis

KW - Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

U2 - 10.1007/s00402-020-03492-6

DO - 10.1007/s00402-020-03492-6

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 32529388

AN - SCOPUS:85086336126

VL - 140

SP - 1503

EP - 1513

JO - Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

JF - Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

SN - 0936-8051

IS - 10

ER -

ID: 253445737