Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Minimally invasive approaches for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty are well-accepted for treating knee arthritis because of the smaller implant size, shorter operative time, and tissue-sparing nature of the procedure. With the introduction of computer alignment systems, a well-aligned and balanced total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be achieved even with smaller surgical exposures. We hypothesized a unicompartmental knee arthroplasty would provide better midterm outcomes than a computer-assisted minimally invasive TKA in patients with isolated medial compartment knee arthritis. We matched (preoperative arthritis severity, age, gender, and preoperative range of motion) 64 knees that had a medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty or a mini-incision computer-assisted TKA. All patients had a varus deformity no greater than 8 degrees and a body mass index lower than 30 kg/m. Patients were followed a minimum of 48 months. In the mini-incision computer-assisted TKA group, all the implants were positioned within 4 degrees of ideal alignment. The surgical time and hospital stay were longer in the computer-assisted TKA group. A unicompartmental knee arthroplasty was estimated to cost at least 3100 euros (approximately US $4100) less. The clinical assessment showed higher functional and Italian Orthopaedic UKA Users Group scores for the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty group.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Confalonieri et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: