Cemented Lateral Unicompartmental Knee Replacement: A retrospective single centre independent series

Background Unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) has functional and economic benefits when compared with total knee replacement, however it is technically demanding and may be associated with higher failure rates. The primary aim of this independent series study was to evaluate the survival of lateral UKRs implanted in our institution and their clinical outcomes. The secondary outcome was to compare the results of mobile and fixed-bearing prostheses. Methods This is a retrospective series study of 183 cemented lateral UKRs implanted in 170 patients, for advanced isolated lateral compartment arthritis, under the care of two senior surgeons. Fixed or mobile-bearing prostheses were used according to the surgeon's preference. Kaplan Meier analysis was used to evaluate prosthesis survival with the endpoint being revision for any reason. A subgroup analysis of survival was also done for each bearing type. Functional outcomes were evaluated using the Oxford knee score (OKS) at final follow-up. Results This series included 103 Fixed-bearing and 80 mobile-bearing prostheses. Median follow-up was 6.9 years. 9 knees required revision. The commonest reason for revision was progression of arthritis to the medial compartment. Dislocation was the commonest cause of revision in the mobile-bearing group. Survival at 10 years was 91.9% with no significant difference (p = 0.083) between bearing types (fixed-bearing 93.8% and mobile-bearing 90.6%). The OKS were comparable in both groups, the mean OKS was 44/48. Conclusion Good survival and functional outcomes can be achieved using cemented lateral UKRs with both bearing types. There was a trend towards superior outcomes in the fixed-bearing group.