Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 3, 2026

The Use of Mixed Reality in Custom-Made Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A First Case Report
Published on: August 4, 2022
Conversion Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty in the Indian Patient: What Can You Expect?
Adit R Maniar1,2,3, Rajesh N Maniar1,2,3, Muhammad Naqvi2
1Breach Candy Hospital Trust, Mumbai, 400026 India.
Introduction:
Our aim was to compare the clinical outcomes of conversion unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) with (a) primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and (b) revision TKA.
Methods:
We retrospectively identified 17 patients undergoing conversion of UKA to TKA by a single surgeon with a minimum 1 year follow-up. These patients were matched 1:1 to patients undergoing primary TKA and revision TKA based on age, sex, BMI and time to final follow-up forming three groups: conversion UKA group (C-UKA), primary TKA group (P-TKA) and revision TKA group (R-TKA). Clinical outcomes were compared using New Knee Society Score (NKSS) and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS). The level of significance was set at 0.05.
Results:
The average time to surgery in the C-UKA group was 7.2 years (range 2.5-17.2), with 82.5% being less than 10 years from index UKA. The mean follow-up was 3.7 years in the C-UKA group. All patients required more than a primary component on the tibial side. Flexion (p = 0.03), symptom (p < 0.001) and function (p < 0.001) subcomponent as well as total NKSS (p = 0.001) were significantly lower in the C-UKA group as compared to the P-TKA group. The flexion (p = 0.67), FJS (p = 0.71) as well as the NKSS and its subcomponents were comparable (p > 0.05) between the C-UKA and R-TKA groups.
Conclusion:
When performing conversion of a medial UKA in the Indian population, a revision component is required in all patients on the tibial side. The clinical outcomes of conversion UKA were poorer than a primary TKA and more comparable to a revision TKA. Surgeons should keep this in consideration when performing a medial UKA, especially in cases with extended indications.