Journal
KNEE
Volume 16, Issue 5, Pages 310-313Publisher
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2008.12.017
Keywords
Unicompartmental knee; Tibial overhang; Outcome
Categories
Funding
- Biomet Knee Fellowship
- Furlong Research Foundation
Ask authors/readers for more resources
As implants are made in incremental sizes and usually do not fit perfectly, surgeons have to decide if it is preferable to over or undersize the components. This is particularly important for unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) tibial components, as overhang may cause irritation of soft tissues and pain, whereas underhang may cause loosening. One hundred and sixty Oxford UKRs were categorised according to whether they had minor (<3 mm, 70%) or major (>= 3 mm, 9%) tibial overhang, or tibial underhang (21%). One year post surgery, there was no significant difference in outcome between the groups. Five years after surgery, those with major overhang had significantly worse Oxford Knee Scores (OKS) (p = 0.001) and pain scores (p = 0.001) than the others. The difference in scores was substantial (OKS = 10 points). There was no difference between the 'minor overhang' and the 'underhang' group. We conclude that surgeons must avoid tibial component overhang of 3 mm or more, as this severely compromises the outcome. Although this study showed no difference between minor overhang or underhang, we would advise against significant underhang because of the theoretical risk of component subsidence and loosening. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available