Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Unicompartmental knee replacement. A minimum 15 year followup study.

M W Squire1, J J Callaghan, D D Goetz

  • 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Iowa College of Medicine, Iowa City 52242, USA.

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
|November 5, 1999
PubMed
Summary

Marmor cemented unicompartmental knee replacements showed long-term issues, with disease progression and tibial subsidence being primary concerns. Revision rates were comparable to total knee replacements, highlighting potential failure points.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Our Efforts Towards a Diversity Pledge.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2021
Same author

Erratum to 'Real Time Conversations: Changes to the Letters to the Editor [The Journal of Arthroplasty 36 (2021) 2249]'.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2021
Same author

Real Time Conversations: Changes to the Letters to the Editor.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2021
Same author

The Problem With Fragile Results.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2021
Same author

COVID Will End But Telemedicine May be Here to Stay.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2021
Same author

The Second Surge of COVID-19: Better Prepared and a Brighter Light at the End of the Tunnel.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2021

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedic Surgery
  • Biomaterials Science

Background:

  • Unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) is a surgical option for knee osteoarthritis.
  • Long-term outcomes of cemented Marmor UKRs require further investigation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the minimum 15-year outcomes of Marmor cemented unicompartmental knee replacements.
  • To identify long-term complications and revision rates.

Main Methods:

  • Retrospective review of 140 Marmor cemented UKRs implanted between 1975 and 1982.
  • Assessment of patient survival, functional scores (Hospital for Special Surgery, Knee Society), and revision reasons at minimum 15-year follow-up.

Main Results:

  • At 15-year follow-up, 48 knees in 34 living patients were assessed. Average HSS scores improved from 57 to 82. Overall revision rate was 10.2%, with 5.1% for disease progression and 4.4% for tibial loosening. For living patients, 12.5% underwent revision, primarily for disease progression (10.4%).

Related Experiment Videos

  • Major long-term problems included disease progression (46%) and tibial subsidence with wear (10.4%).
  • Revision for fixation failure was comparable to fixed-bearing total knee replacement outcomes.

    • Conclusions:

    • Marmor cemented UKRs demonstrate acceptable functional outcomes at long-term follow-up.
    • Disease progression and tibial subsidence with wear are significant long-term challenges.
    • Revision rates for fixation failure are comparable to total knee replacements, suggesting UKR may be a viable alternative for select patients.