Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 28, 2025

The Transition to an Anterior-Based Muscle Sparing Approach Improves Early Postoperative Function but is Associated with a Learning Curve
Published on: September 7, 2022
Reduced 5-Year Risk for Revision of the Oxford UKA Using New Instrumentation versus Conventional Instrumentation: A
Stephan J van Langeveld1, Stein J Janssen2, Koen L M Koenraadt1
1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, FORCE (Foundation for Orthopaedic Research Care and Education), Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands.
Abstract:
Microplasty instrumentation was introduced for a more consistent surgical implantation technique, especially component alignment and tibial resection level, of the Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and thereby aims to improve UKA survival. This study aimed to assess the 5-year risk for revision and reasons for revision of the Oxford medial UKA using the new instrumentation (Microplasty) with its predecessor, that is, conventional instrumentation (Phase 3). Data of all medial UKAs from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (Landelijke Registratie Orthopedische Implantaten) between 2007 and 2019 were collected. Type of instrumentation was divided into new (Microplasty) and conventional instrumentation. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to calculate 5-year cumulative revision percentage with any reason for revision as end point. A multivariable Cox regression with outcome revision of UKA adjusted for age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, surgical history, and type of fixation was performed. Additionally, reasons for revision at 3-year were assessed and tested through Fisher's exact tests. A total of 12,867 Oxford medial UKAs, 8,170 using new and 4,697 using conventional instrumentation, were included. The 5-year revision percentage was 9.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.4-10.1%) for UKAs using the conventional and 6.1% (95% CI: 5.4-6.7%) for new instrumentation. The adjusted hazard ratio for revision at 5-year follow-up was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.63-0.87) in favor of UKAs using the new instrumentation. Malalignment was more frequently registered as reason for revision in UKAs using the conventional compared with the new instrumentation (16% versus 7.5%; p = 0.001). Our results show a reduced 5-year risk for revision of the medial Oxford UKAs using the new compared with the conventional instrumentation. This might be the result of a lower revision rate for malalignment in UKAs using the new instrumentation.
More Related Videos
04:41Treatment with Locking Intramedullary Nailing for Intertrochanteric Fracture of the Femur Utilizing a New Awl with a Distal Positioner
Published on: June 6, 2025
07:33In Vitro Application of a Wireless Sensor in Flexion-Extension Gap Balance of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty
Published on: May 5, 2023