{"title":"A comparative study of single-stage bilateral vs. unilateral medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty on complications, clinical outcomes, and costs.","authors":"Kao-Chang Tu, Han-Ting Shih, Shun-Ping Wang, Kun-Hui Chen","doi":"10.3389/fsurg.2024.1470421","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the short-term recovery and cost-effectiveness of bilateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) compared to staged unilateral UKA. The study analyzed postoperative pain scores, medical costs, and complications in patients with knee osteoarthritis who underwent these procedures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 226 patients who received either unilateral UKA (Group A, <i>n</i> = 170) or bilateral UKA (Group B, <i>n</i> = 56) using the mobile-bearing UKA were included in the study. Patient demographics, surgical details, postoperative pain scores, knee range of motion, length of hospital stay, self-controlled analgesic use, total medical costs, and complications were retrospectively collected from medical records.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The demographic characteristics were comparable between the groups. Group B had a longer surgical time and higher medical costs than Group A. However, there were no significant differences in hospital stay, pain scores, or knee range of motion between the two groups. Complications were infrequent and not significantly different. Insert dislocation and loosening were the most common complications. Patient-controlled analgesia effectively reduced pain scores in Group A but not in Group B.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Bilateral UKA does not significantly affect hospital stay, postoperative pain, or complications compared to unilateral UKA. Although bilateral UKA requires longer surgical time and incurs higher costs, it offers the potential benefit of reducing anesthesia-related complications and overall health insurance expenditures. This study recommends bilateral UKA as a suitable option for patients with bilateral knee osteoarthritis, given its comparable short-term outcomes and potential cost-saving advantages.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>","PeriodicalId":12564,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Surgery","volume":"11 ","pages":"1470421"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11480034/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2024.1470421","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the short-term recovery and cost-effectiveness of bilateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) compared to staged unilateral UKA. The study analyzed postoperative pain scores, medical costs, and complications in patients with knee osteoarthritis who underwent these procedures.
Methods: A total of 226 patients who received either unilateral UKA (Group A, n = 170) or bilateral UKA (Group B, n = 56) using the mobile-bearing UKA were included in the study. Patient demographics, surgical details, postoperative pain scores, knee range of motion, length of hospital stay, self-controlled analgesic use, total medical costs, and complications were retrospectively collected from medical records.
Results: The demographic characteristics were comparable between the groups. Group B had a longer surgical time and higher medical costs than Group A. However, there were no significant differences in hospital stay, pain scores, or knee range of motion between the two groups. Complications were infrequent and not significantly different. Insert dislocation and loosening were the most common complications. Patient-controlled analgesia effectively reduced pain scores in Group A but not in Group B.
Conclusion: Bilateral UKA does not significantly affect hospital stay, postoperative pain, or complications compared to unilateral UKA. Although bilateral UKA requires longer surgical time and incurs higher costs, it offers the potential benefit of reducing anesthesia-related complications and overall health insurance expenditures. This study recommends bilateral UKA as a suitable option for patients with bilateral knee osteoarthritis, given its comparable short-term outcomes and potential cost-saving advantages.
期刊介绍:
Evidence of surgical interventions go back to prehistoric times. Since then, the field of surgery has developed into a complex array of specialties and procedures, particularly with the advent of microsurgery, lasers and minimally invasive techniques. The advanced skills now required from surgeons has led to ever increasing specialization, though these still share important fundamental principles.
Frontiers in Surgery is the umbrella journal representing the publication interests of all surgical specialties. It is divided into several “Specialty Sections” listed below. All these sections have their own Specialty Chief Editor, Editorial Board and homepage, but all articles carry the citation Frontiers in Surgery.
Frontiers in Surgery calls upon medical professionals and scientists from all surgical specialties to publish their experimental and clinical studies in this journal. By assembling all surgical specialties, which nonetheless retain their independence, under the common umbrella of Frontiers in Surgery, a powerful publication venue is created. Since there is often overlap and common ground between the different surgical specialties, assembly of all surgical disciplines into a single journal will foster a collaborative dialogue amongst the surgical community. This means that publications, which are also of interest to other surgical specialties, will reach a wider audience and have greater impact.
The aim of this multidisciplinary journal is to create a discussion and knowledge platform of advances and research findings in surgical practice today to continuously improve clinical management of patients and foster innovation in this field.