Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What effect does preoperative flexion contracture have on the component angles in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The indication for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been extended to cases with some degree of preoperative knee flexion contracture recently. The purpose of this study was to clarify the effect of flexion contracture on component angles.

Materials and methods

Thirty-five fixed-bearing UKAs using the spacer block technique with preoperative flexion contracture (Group FC) and 35 UKAs using the same technique without preoperative flexion contracture (Group NC) were included. Using radiographs, the coronal femoral component angle, coronal tibial component angle, sagittal femoral component angle, and sagittal tibial component angle were determined. Also, extension and flexion angles of the knee as well as coronal Hip–Knee–Ankle (HKA) angles in long-leg standing radiographs were measured. The data about the thickness of the selected insert were also collected. The above results were compared between the two groups.

Results

The femoral component tended to be placed in a more varus and flexed position in Group FC, while no significant difference was found about the tibial component angles. While there was no significant difference in pre- and postoperative knee flexion angles between the two groups, flexion contracture remained postoperatively in Group FC. Preoperative HKA angle was greater in Group FC while the difference was no longer significant postoperatively. Regarding the thickness of the selected insert, thicker inserts tended to be used in Group FC.

Conclusions

In fixed-bearing UKA with the spacer block technique, the femoral component tended to be placed in a flexed and varus position in the knees with preoperative flexion contracture.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Authors can confirm that all relevant data are included in the article.

References

  1. Kozinn SC, Scott R (1989) Unicondylar knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 71(1):145–150

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Seng CS, Ho DC, Chong HC et al (2017) Outcomes and survivorship of unicondylar knee arthroplasty in patients with severe deformity. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(3):639–644

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Redish MH, Fennema P (2018) Good results with minimally invasive unicompartmental knee resurfacing after 10-year follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 28(5):959–965

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jenny JY (2018) Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 28(5):793–797

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Li Y, Kakar RS, Fu YC, Mahoney OM, Kinsey TL, Simpson KJ (2018) Knee strength, power and stair performance of the elderly 5 years after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 28(7):1411–1416

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Migliorini F, Tingart M, Niewiera M, Rath B, Eschweiler J (2019) Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty for knee osteoarthritis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 29(4):947–955

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dretakis K, Igoumenou VG (2019) Outcomes of robotic-arm-assisted medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: minimum 3-year follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 29(6):1305–1311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hanada M, Hotta K, Matsuyama Y (2021) Dependence of knee range of motion on the alignment of femoral and tibial components after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 31(2):291–298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Arirachakaran A, Choowit P, Putananon C, Muangsiri S, Kongtharvonskul J (2015) Is unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) superior to total knee arthroplasty (TKA)? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25(5):799–806

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dai X, Fang J, Jiang L, Xiong Y, Zhang M, Zhu S (2018) How does the inclination of the tibial component matter? A three-dimensional finite element analysis of medial mobile-bearing unicompartmental arthroplasty. Knee 25(3):434–444

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Danese I, Pankaj P, Scott CEH (2019) The effect of malalignment on proximal tibial strain in fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a comparison between metal-backed and all-polyethylene components using a validated finite element model. Bone Joint Res 8(2):55–64

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Iesaka K, Tsumura H, Sonoda H, Sawatari T, Takasita M, Torisu T (2002) The effects of tibial component inclination on bone stress after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Biomech 35(7):969–974

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sawatari T, Tsumura H, Iesaka K, Furushiro Y, Torisu T (2005) Three-dimensional finite element analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty–the influence of tibial component inclination. J Orthop Res 23(3):549–554

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sekiguchi K, Nakamura S, Kuriyama S et al (2019) Effect of tibial component alignment on knee kinematics and ligament tension in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint Res 8(3):126–135

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Simpson DJ, Price AJ, Gulati A, Murray DW, Gill HS (2009) Elevated proximal tibial strains following unicompartmental knee replacement–a possible cause of pain. Med Eng Phys 31(7):752–757

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Woiczinski M, Schröder C, Paulus A et al (2020) Varus or valgus positioning of the tibial component of a unicompartmental fixed-bearing knee arthroplasty does not increase wear. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(9):3016–3021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fuller BC, Lonner JH, Berend KR, Berger RA, Gerlinger TL (2021) Partial knee arthroplasty: the state of the art. Instr Course Lect 70:235–246

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Winnock de Grave P, Barbier J et al (2018) Outcomes of a fixed-bearing, medial, cemented unicondylar knee arthroplasty design: survival analysis and functional score of 460 cases. J Arthroplasty 33(9):2792–2799

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gill JR, Nicolai P (2019) Clinical results and 12-year survivorship of the Physica ZUK unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee 26(3):750–758

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Nakano N, Takayama K, Kuroda Y et al (2021) Preoperative varus deformity of the knee affects the intraoperative joint gap in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 32:90–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Suda Y, Takayama K, Ishida K et al (2020) Improved implant alignment accuracy with an accelerometer-based portable navigation system in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(9):2917–2923

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fournier G, Gaillard R, Swan J, Batailler C, Lustig S, Servien E (2021) Stiffness after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Risk factors and arthroscopic treatment. SICOT J 7:35

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Chen JY, Loh B, Woo YL, Chia SL, Lo NN, Yeo SJ (2016) Fixed flexion deformity after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: how much is too much. J Arthroplasty 31(6):1313–1316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yeh JZY, Chen JY, Lim JW et al (2018) Postoperative fixed flexion deformity greater than 10° lead to poorer functional outcome 10 years after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26(6):1723–1727

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gill JR, Vermuyten L, Wastnedge E, Nicolai P (2021) The effect of component alignment on clinical outcomes in fixed bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 29:126–133

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Park KK, Koh YG, Park KM, Park JH, Kang KT (2019) Biomechanical effect with respect to the sagittal positioning of the femoral component in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Biomed Mater Eng 30(2):171–182

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Matziolis G, Mueller T, Layher F, Wagner A (2018) The femoral component alignment resulting from spacer block technique is not worse than after intramedullary guided technique in medial unicompartimental knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 138(6):865–870

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Khow YZ, Liow MHL, Lee M, Chen JY, Lo NN, Yeo SJ (2021) Coronal alignment of fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty femoral component may affect long-term clinical outcomes. J Arthropl 36(2):478–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rivière C, Sivaloganathan S, Villet L et al (2022) Kinematic alignment of medial UKA is safe: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 30(3):1082–1094

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by Takeda Science Foundation (Grant number: 2022).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan

    Naoki Nakano, Masanori Tsubosaka, Tomoyuki Kamenaga, Yuichi Kuroda, Shinya Hayashi, Ryosuke Kuroda & Tomoyuki Matsumoto

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kobe Kaisei Hospital, 3-11-15, Shinoharakita-machi, Nada-ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 657-0068, Japan

    Kazunari Ishida

Authors
  1. Naoki Nakano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Masanori Tsubosaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tomoyuki Kamenaga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yuichi Kuroda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kazunari Ishida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Shinya Hayashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ryosuke Kuroda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Tomoyuki Matsumoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

NN involved in conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, writing—original draft, and writing—review and editing. MT involved in formal analysis, investigation, and writing—review and editing. TK involved in formal analysis, investigation, and writing—review and editing. YK involved in formal analysis, investigation, and writing—review and editing. KI involved in investigation and validation. SH involved in investigation and validation. RK involved in supervision, writing—review and editing. TM involved in conceptualization, supervision, and writing—review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naoki Nakano.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical approval

All procedures were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Consent to participate

Written informed consent was obtained from all patients.

Consent to publication

Written informed consent was obtained from all patients.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nakano, N., Tsubosaka, M., Kamenaga, T. et al. What effect does preoperative flexion contracture have on the component angles in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty?. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-024-03929-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-024-03929-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation