Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/63892
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorClark, M.-
dc.contributor.authorCampbell, D.-
dc.contributor.authorKiss, G.-
dc.contributor.authorDobson, P.-
dc.contributor.authorLewis, P.-
dc.date.issued2010-
dc.identifier.citationClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 2010; 468(2):576-580-
dc.identifier.issn0009-921X-
dc.identifier.issn1528-1132-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/63892-
dc.description.abstract<h4>Background</h4>Medial compartment osteoarthritis is a common disorder that often is treated by unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Although the Oxford 3 prosthesis is commonly used based on revision rate and cumulative survival, our experience suggests that although there may be adequate implant survival rates, we observed a worrisome and undisclosed reintervention rate of nonrevision procedures.<h4>Purpose</h4>We describe the frequency and cause of repeat intervention subsequent to implanting this device.<h4>Methods</h4>Between 1998 and 2005, 398 patients underwent UKA using the Oxford 3 prosthesis. The minimum followup was 12 months (mean, 43 months; range, 12-102 months).<h4>Results</h4>Forty of the 398 (10%) patients had 55 (13.8%) repeat anesthetics (reintervention). There were 38 nonrevision reinterventions. Revision was performed in 15 patients (3.8%), but two patients had a second revision (17 revisions or 4.3%). We revised the UKA to a second UKA in seven of the 15 cases but two subsequently were rerevised to a TKA; eight were revised directly to a TKA.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Although our data confirm the reported revision rates for this prosthesis, we observed a substantial reintervention rate. Most of the reinterventions are minor and are diagnosed frequently and treated arthroscopically. If revision is required, a second UKA may be considered and performed successfully in patients with isolated loosening of one component.<h4>Level of evidence</h4>Level II, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.-
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityMarcia Clark, David G. Campbell, Greg Kiss, Peter J. Dobson, Peter L. Lewis-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkins-
dc.rights© The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2009-
dc.source.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-1089-y-
dc.subjectKnee-
dc.subjectHumans-
dc.subjectOsteoarthritis, Knee-
dc.subjectProsthesis Failure-
dc.subjectTreatment Outcome-
dc.subjectArthroplasty, Replacement, Knee-
dc.subjectReoperation-
dc.subjectRetrospective Studies-
dc.subjectProsthesis Design-
dc.subjectKnee Prosthesis-
dc.subjectTime Factors-
dc.subjectAged-
dc.subjectAged, 80 and over-
dc.subjectMiddle Aged-
dc.subjectFemale-
dc.subjectMale-
dc.titleReintervention after Mobile-bearing Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty-
dc.typeJournal article-
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11999-009-1089-y-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
dc.identifier.orcidCampbell, D. [0000-0002-1572-9529]-
dc.identifier.orcidLewis, P. [0000-0003-2641-3754]-
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest 5
Orthopaedics and Trauma publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.