Fractures in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty are associated with a decreased medial keel‑cortex distance of the tibial implant
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose This retrospective single-center study aimed to investigate incidence and risk factors influencing tibial periprosthetic fractures (TPF) in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), with a specific focus on tibial component positioning and sizing. Methods A total of 2063 patients with medial UKA using the Oxford® mobile partial knee implant were analyzed between July 2014 and September 2022. Various preoperative and postoperative radiographic parameters determining pre- and postoperative alignment and implant positioning, incidence and characteristics of periprosthetic fractures, and patient demographics were assessed. Statistical analyses, including Mann–Whitney U test and logistic regression, were conducted to identify significant associations and predictors of tibial fractures. Results Of the 1853 cases that were finally included in the study, 19 (1%) patients experienced TPF. The fracture group presented with a significantly shorter relative mediolateral and posteroanterior distance between the keel and cortex [mediolateral: 23.3% (23.2–24.8%) versus 27.1% (25.7–28.3%), p < 0.001; posteroanterior: 8.4% (6.3–10.3%) versus 10.0% (9.8–10.1%), p = 0.004]. Additionally, an increased posterior tibial slope in pre- and postoperative radiographs [preoperative: 10.4° (8.6–11.1°) versus 7.7° (5.4–10.0°), p < 0.001; postoperative 9.1° ± 3.1° versus 7.5° (5.9–9.0°), p = 0.030] was observed in the fracture group. Furthermore, the use of smaller-sized implants (AA) was associated with higher fracture rates (p < 0.001). Anatomical variants, such as a medial overhanging tibial plateau, were not observed. Conclusions In UKA, type Oxford TPF are linked to shorter mediolateral and posteroanterior keel-cortex distances, increased pre- and postoperative PTS, and small implant sizes (AA). Fracture lines often extend from the distal keel to the medial tibial cortex. These findings emphasize the importance of precise implant positioning and sizing to minimize fracture risk.
Abstract
Purpose This retrospective single-center study aimed to investigate incidence and risk factors influencing tibial periprosthetic fractures (TPF) in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), with a specific focus on tibial component positioning and sizing. Methods A total of 2063 patients with medial UKA using the Oxford® mobile partial knee implant were analyzed between July 2014 and September 2022. Various preoperative and postoperative radiographic parameters determining pre- and postoperative alignment and implant positioning, incidence and characteristics of periprosthetic fractures, and patient demographics were assessed. Statistical analyses, including Mann–Whitney U test and logistic regression, were conducted to identify significant associations and predictors of tibial fractures. Results Of the 1853 cases that were finally included in the study, 19 (1%) patients experienced TPF. The fracture group presented with a significantly shorter relative mediolateral and posteroanterior distance between the keel and cortex [mediolateral: 23.3% (23.2–24.8%) versus 27.1% (25.7–28.3%), p < 0.001; posteroanterior: 8.4% (6.3–10.3%) versus 10.0% (9.8–10.1%), p = 0.004]. Additionally, an increased posterior tibial slope in pre- and postoperative radiographs [preoperative: 10.4° (8.6–11.1°) versus 7.7° (5.4–10.0°), p < 0.001; postoperative 9.1° ± 3.1° versus 7.5° (5.9–9.0°), p = 0.030] was observed in the fracture group. Furthermore, the use of smaller-sized implants (AA) was associated with higher fracture rates (p < 0.001). Anatomical variants, such as a medial overhanging tibial plateau, were not observed. Conclusions In UKA, type Oxford TPF are linked to shorter mediolateral and posteroanterior keel-cortex distances, increased pre- and postoperative PTS, and small implant sizes (AA). Fracture lines often extend from the distal keel to the medial tibial cortex. These findings emphasize the importance of precise implant positioning and sizing to minimize fracture risk.
참고문헌 (33)
- Liddle AD, "Adverse outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee replacement in 101 330 matched patients : a study of data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales", Lancet, 384, pp.1437~1445 (2014)[DOI]
- Wilson HA, "Patient relevant outcomes of unicompartmental versus total knee replacement : systematic review and meta-analysis", BMJ (2019)[DOI]
- Price AJ, "A second decade lifetable survival analysis of the oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty", Clin Orthop Relat Res, 469, pp.174~179 (2011)[DOI]
- Akan B, "Cemented versus uncemented oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty : is there a difference?", Adv Orthop (2013)[DOI]
- Berger RA, "Results of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years of follow-up", J Bone Joint Surg Am, 87A, pp.999~1006 (2005)[DOI]
- Pandit H, "Medial tibial plateau fracture and the Oxford unicompartmental knee", Orthopedics, 30, pp.28~ (2007)
- Song MH, "Early complications after minimally invasive mobile-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty", J Arthroplasty, 24, pp.1281~1284 (2009)[DOI]
- Burger JA, "Comparable incidence of periprosthetic tibial fractures in cementless and cemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty : a systematic review and meta-analysis", Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 30, pp.852~874 (2022)[DOI]
- Li ZX, "An early periprosthetic fracture of a cementless oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty : risk factors and mitigation strategies", J Orthopaedic Case Reports, 11, pp.65~69 (2021)[DOI]
- Clarius M, "Periprosthetic tibial fractures in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty as a function of extended sagittal saw cuts : an experimental study", Knee, 17, pp.57~60 (2010)[DOI]
- Sloper PJH, "Intra-operative tibial plateau fracture during unicompartmental knee replacement : a case report", Knee, 10, pp.367~369 (2003)[DOI]
- Inoue S, "The valgus inclination of the tibial component increases the risk of medial tibial condylar fractures in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty", J Arthroplasty, 31, pp.2025~2030 (2016)[DOI]
- Brumby SA, "Tibial plateau stress fracture—A complication of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using 4 guide pinholes", J Arthroplasty, 18, pp.809~812 (2003)[DOI]
- Rudol G, "Medial tibial plateau fracture complicating unicompartmental knee arthroplasty", J Arthroplasty, 22, pp.148~150 (2007)[DOI]
- Matsuda S, "Tibial shaft axis does not always serve as a correct coronal landmark in total knee arthroplasty for varus knees", J Arthroplasty, 18, pp.56~62 (2003)[DOI]
- Hiranaka T, "A modified under-vastus approach for knee arthroplasty with anatomical repair of soft tissue", Clin Orthop Surg, 11, pp.490~494 (2019)[DOI]
- Yoshikawa R, "The medial eminence line for predicting tibial fracture risk after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty", Clin Orthop Surg, 12, pp.166~170 (2020)[DOI]
- Hiranaka T, "Tibial shape and size predicts the risk of tibial plateau fracture after cementless unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in Japanese patients", Bone Joint J, 102-B, pp.861~867 (2020)[DOI]
- Kamenaga T, "Short distance from the keel to the posterior tibial cortex is associated with fracture after cementless Oxford UKA in Asian patients", Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 30, pp.1220~1230 (2022)[DOI]
- Watrinet J, "Undersizing of the tibial component in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty(UKA)increases the risk of periprosthetic fractures", Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 144, pp.1353~1359 (2024)
- Wood MJ, "Periprosthetic tibial fracture as a complication of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty : current insights", Injury, 55, pp.111654~ (2024)
- Hamilton T, "Radiological decision aid to determine suitability for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty : development and preliminary validation", Bone Joint J, 98, pp.3~10 (2016)
- Pandit H, "Minimally invasive Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement RESULTS OF 1000 CASES", J Bone Joint Surg British, 93B, pp.198~204 (2011)[DOI]
- Sheehy L, "Does measurement of the anatomic axis consistently predict hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) for knee alignment studies in osteoarthritis? Analysis of long limb radiographs from the multicenter osteoarthritis (MOST) study", Osteoarthr Cartil, 19, pp.58~64 (2011)
- Yokoyama M, "Factors related to stress fracture after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty", Asia-Pacific J Sport Med Arthrosc Rehabilit Technol, 15, pp.1~5 (2019)[DOI]
- Faul F, "Statistical power analyses using G*Power 31 : tests for correlation and regression analyses", Behav Res Methods, 41, pp.1149~1160 (2009)[DOI]
- Small SR, "Tibial loading after UKA : evaluation of tibial slope, resection depth, medial shift and component rotation", J Arthroplasty, 28, pp.179~183 (2013)
- Sawatari T, "Three-dimensional finite element analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty–the influence of tibial component inclination", J Orthop Res, 23, pp.549~554 (2005)
- Vasso M, "Minor varus alignment provides better results than neutral alignment in medial UKA", Knee, 22, pp.117~121 (2015)
- Sekiguchi K, "Effect of tibial component alignment on knee kinematics and ligament tension in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty", Bone Joint Res, 8, pp.126~135 (2019)
- Innocenti B, "Biomechanical effects of different varus and valgus alignments in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty", J Arthroplasty, 31, pp.2685~2691 (2016)
- Mohammad HR, "Comparison of the 10-year outcomes of cemented and cementless unicompartmental knee replacements : data from the national joint registry for England, wales, northern Ireland and the isle of man", Acta Orthop, 91, pp.76~ (2020)[DOI]
- Kojima G, "Frailty as a predictor of fractures among community-dwelling older people : a systematic review and meta-analysis", Bone, 90, pp.116~122 (2016)[DOI]