Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Role of alignment in successful clinical outcomes following medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: current concepts
  1. Stephanie C Petterson1,
  2. Travis D Blood2,
  3. Kevin D Plancher1,2,3,4
  1. 1 Department of Clinical Research, Orthopaedic Foundation, Stamford, Connecticut, USA
  2. 2 Plancher Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine PLLC, New York, New York, USA
  3. 3 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, New YOrk, United States
  4. 4 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, United States
  1. Correspondence to Dr. Kevin D Plancher, Plancher Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine PLLC, New York, NY 10128, USA; kplancher{at}plancherortho.com

Abstract

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has become increasingly more common, indicating the necessity to better understand factors that may impact outcomes and survivorship. Overcorrection or undercorrection of a varus deformity can increase the risk of postoperative complications including contralateral, lateral compartmental osteoarthritis, component loosening, and component wear following medial UKA. There is no general consensus on the amount of alignment correction to optimise outcomes. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the current literature related to alignment, intraoperative alignment correction, and the impact on outcomes and survivorship following medial UKA as well as to explore alternative surgical techniques including patient-specific instrumentation and robotic assistance when managing the varus-malaligned knee with medial UKA. Understanding each of these factors and how they interact is vital in providing patients with promising outcomes following UKA. The ideal alignment is unknown; however, the key is to avoid severe undercorrection and overcorrection of varus malalignment for superior outcomes following medial UKA.

  • arthroplasty
  • knee
  • X-ray
  • osteoarthritis
View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors KDP made substantial contribution to the design of the work and analysis of the data; and contributed to the drafting of the manuscript and revising it for important intellectual content; and had final approval of the final version; and he agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. SCP contributed to the design of the work and analysis of the data; and contributed to the drafting of the manuscript and revising it for important intellectual content; and had final approval of the final version; and she agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. TDB contributed to the design of the work and analysis of the data; and contributed to the drafting of the manuscript and revising it for important intellectual content; and had final approval of the final version; and he agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data availability statement All data relevant to the study are included in the article.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles

  • Editorial
    David Parker