Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Has Lower Infection, Conversion, and Complication Rates Compared to High Tibial Osteotomy

Abstract Introduction  Isolated medial knee osteoarthritis can be surgically treated with either unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) or high tibial osteotomy (HTO). Proponents of UKA suggest superior survivorship, while HTO offers theoretically improved alignment and joint preservation delaying total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Therefore, we compared complications in a large population of patients undergoing UKAs or HTOs. We specifically assessed 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years: (1) periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates, (2) conversion to TKA rates, as well as (3) complication rates. Methods  A review of an administrative claims database was used to identify patients undergoing primary UKA ( n  = 13,674) or HTO ( n  = 1,096) from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2019. Complication rates at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years were compared between groups using unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals. Subsequently, multivariate logistic regressions were performed for PJI and conversion to TKA rates. Results  At all time points, patients who underwent UKA were associated with lower rates of infection compared with those who underwent HTOs (all OR ≤ 0.51, all p ≤ 0.010). After 1 year, patients who received UKAs were found to have lower risk of requiring a conversion to a TKA versus those who received HTOs (all OR ≤ 0.55, all p  < 0.001). Complications such as dislocations, periprosthetic fractures, and surgical site infections were found at lower odds in UKA compared with HTO patients. Conclusion  This study provides large-scale analyses demonstrating that UKA is associated with lower infection rates and fewer conversions to TKA compared with patients who have undergone HTO. Dislocations, periprosthetic fractures, and surgical site infections were also found to be lower among UKA patients. However, with careful patient selection, good results and preservation of the native knee are achieved with HTOs. Therefore, UKA versus HTO may be an important discussion to have with patients in an effort to lower the incidence of postoperative infections and complications.

[1]  J. Seon,et al.  A comparative study of 21,194 UKAs and 49,270 HTOs for the risk of unanticipated events in mid-age patients from the national claims data in South Korea , 2022, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.

[2]  J. Dickens,et al.  Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: More Conversions, Fewer Complications Than Proximal Tibial Osteotomy in a Young Population. , 2021, Journal of Arthroplasty.

[3]  M. Cross,et al.  Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Is Associated With a Lower Rate of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Compared to Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2021, Arthroplasty today.

[4]  Y. Chan,et al.  Risk Factor Analysis for Infection after Medial Open Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy , 2021, Journal of clinical medicine.

[5]  Meichao Deng,et al.  Unicondylar knee replacement versus total knee replacement for the treatment of medial knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2021, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[6]  R. V. van Arkel,et al.  The compartmental distribution of knee osteoarthritis - a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2020, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[7]  J. Seon,et al.  Comparison of Long-Term Survival Analysis Between Open-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy and Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. , 2020, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[8]  J. Faulkner,et al.  Return to Physical Activity After High Tibial Osteotomy or Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Pooling Data Analysis , 2020, The American journal of sports medicine.

[9]  J. Ehiorobo,et al.  Robotic-Assisted Versus Manual Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review. , 2020, Surgical technology international.

[10]  H. Yasunaga,et al.  Type of bone graft and primary diagnosis were associated with nosocomial surgical site infection after high tibial osteotomy: analysis of a national database , 2020, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.

[11]  J. Argenson,et al.  Medial femorotibial osteoarthritis of the knee: total or partial knee replacement? , 2020, Annals of translational medicine.

[12]  M. Roche,et al.  Comparison of Patient Demographics and Utilization Trends of Robotic-Assisted and Non-Robotic-Assisted Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty , 2019, The Journal of Knee Surgery.

[13]  James R. Robinson,et al.  The clinical and cost-effectiveness of total versus partial knee replacement in patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis (TOPKAT): 5-year outcomes of a randomised controlled trial , 2019, The Lancet.

[14]  F. Haddad,et al.  Robotic unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Current challenges and future perspectives , 2019, Bone & joint research.

[15]  Y. In,et al.  Predictive factors for satisfaction after contemporary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and high tibial osteotomy in isolated medial femorotibial osteoarthritis. , 2019, Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR.

[16]  Michael A Mont,et al.  Revision Analysis of Robotic Arm-Assisted and Manual Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. , 2019, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[17]  Y. In,et al.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is superior to high tibial osteotomy in post-operative recovery and participation in recreational and sports activities , 2018, International Orthopaedics.

[18]  Darwin Chen,et al.  Robotic-assisted versus standard unicompartmental knee arthroplasty—evaluation of manuscript conflict of interests, funding, scientific quality and bibliometrics , 2018, International Orthopaedics.

[19]  P. Neyret,et al.  Faster return to sport after robotic-assisted lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a comparative study , 2018, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[20]  Y. Qiu,et al.  Patterns of Compartment Involvement in End‐stage Knee Osteoarthritis in a Chinese Orthopedic Center: Implications for Implant Choice , 2018, Orthopaedic surgery.

[21]  R. Quinn,et al.  Surgical Management of Osteoarthritis of the Knee , 2018, The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

[22]  B. Levine,et al.  AAOS Appropriate Use Criteria: Surgical Management of Osteoarthritis of the Knee. , 2018, Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

[23]  P. Rowe,et al.  Robotic-Arm-Assisted vs Conventional Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. The 2-Year Clinical Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial. , 2018, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[24]  Y. Shin,et al.  Better clinical outcomes after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty when comparing with high tibial osteotomy , 2017, Medicine.

[25]  Lidong Wu,et al.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, is it superior to high tibial osteotomy in treating unicompartmental osteoarthritis? A meta-analysis and systemic review , 2017, Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research.

[26]  D. Jevsevar,et al.  AAOS Clinical Practice Guideline: Surgical Management of Osteoarthritis of the Knee: Evidence-based Guideline. , 2016, The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

[27]  D. Jevsevar,et al.  Surgical Management of Osteoarthritis of the Knee: Evidence-based Guideline. , 2016, The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

[28]  A. Pearle,et al.  Why Do Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasties Fail Today? , 2016, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[29]  S. Bini,et al.  Surgeon, implant, and patient variables may explain variability in early revision rates reported for unicompartmental arthroplasty. , 2013, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[30]  V. Sauleau,et al.  Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: does tibial component position influence clinical outcomes and arthroplasty survival? , 2013, Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR.

[31]  B. Beynnon,et al.  Chronic in vivo load alteration induces degenerative changes in the rat tibiofemoral joint. , 2013, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[32]  M Jakopec,et al.  Hands-on robotic unicompartmental knee replacement: a prospective, randomised controlled study of the acrobot system. , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[33]  J. Galante,et al.  Results of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years of follow-up. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.