Incidence and reasons for reoperation after minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

J Arthroplasty. 2006 Sep;21(6 Suppl 2):98-107. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.05.010.

Abstract

The goal of this report is to review reoperations undertaken on the initial 221 unicompartmental arthroplasties performed using a minimally invasive technique. A comparison was then performed between these cases and the previous 514 open medial unicompartmental arthroplasties performed at our institution. In the minimally invasive group, 9 (4.1%) of 221 knees were revised (8 for component loosening, 1 for deep infection). Of 212 unrevised knees, 16 have required a total of 18 nonrevision reoperations. Overall, 25 of 221 knees required at least 1 reoperation (total reoperation rate, 11.3%). Despite an accelerated recovery and decreased hospital stay in our minimally invasive unicompartmental arthroplasties, the rate of revision due to aseptic loosening (3.7% vs 1.0%) and the overall reoperation rate (11.3% vs 8.6%) compare unfavorably with those performed with an open technique.

Publication types

  • Evaluation Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / adverse effects*
  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / methods
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Knee Joint / diagnostic imaging
  • Length of Stay
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures / adverse effects*
  • Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures / methods
  • Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures / statistics & numerical data
  • Prosthesis Failure*
  • Radiography
  • Reoperation / statistics & numerical data
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Treatment Outcome