Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: The main purpose of this study is to assess the compatibility of medial tibial condyle (MTC) morphometry of Indian population with that of six contemporary UKA prostheses tibial components. We hypothesized that from the currently available UKA designs at least one would fit the MTC morphometry optimally as per the manufacturer's recommendation. METHODS: We used CT morphometric data of 100 (66 males and 34 females) consecutive nonarthritic adult knees with reference to the MTC to assess the compatibility of currently available (in India) UKA prostheses. Each MTC was measured in the anteroposterior dimension, mediolateral at pre-defined points and the MTC aspect ratio calculated. Proportion of knees which could be optimally fitted with the existing UKA tibial components was calculated. As the anteroposterior dimension increased, the MTC aspect ratio decreased. There was asymmetry of anteroposterior halves with maximum mediolateral width being posterior to the central mediolateral width by 5.5 (SD 2.8) mm. Optimal anteroposterior fit ranged from 66 to 93%. However, optimal mediolateral fit as well, ranged from 5 to 37% with underhang present in 17-61% and > 2 mm medial overhang present in 0-35% cases. In 23% of cases, not a single implant could be fitted optimally. CONCLUSION: Currently available UKA implants do not provide optimal tibial fit in nearly 25% of Indian patients. A surgeon needs to be aware of these limitations of existing implants when considering UKA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kantanavar et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: