Does activity affect the outcome of the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement?
Abstract Background High levels of activity are considered to be a contraindication to unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) and are not recommended after UKR. To determine if these recommendations should apply to the mobile-bearing Oxford UKR, this study assessed the effect of post-operative acti...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The knee 2016-03, Vol.23 (2), p.327-330 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 330 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 327 |
container_title | The knee |
container_volume | 23 |
creator | Ali, Adam M Pandit, Hemant Liddle, Alexander D Jenkins, Cathy Mellon, Stephen Dodd, Christopher A.F Murray, David W |
description | Abstract Background High levels of activity are considered to be a contraindication to unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) and are not recommended after UKR. To determine if these recommendations should apply to the mobile-bearing Oxford UKR, this study assessed the effect of post-operative activity level on the outcome of this device. Methods The outcome of the first 1000 Phase 3 cemented Oxford UKRs implanted between 1998 and 2010 was assessed using survival analysis, the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the American Knee Society Objective (KSS-O) and Functional (KSS-F) Scores. Patients were grouped according to the maximum post-operative Tegner Activity Score. Results The mean follow-up was 6.1 years (range 1 to 14). Overall, increasing activity was associated with superior survival (p = 0.025). In the high activity group, with Tegner ≥ 5 (n = 115) 2.6% were revised and the 12-year survival was 97.3% (confidence interval (CI): 92.0% to 99.1%). In the low activity group, with Tegner ≤ 4, (n = 885) 4.3% were revised and the 12-year survival was 94.0% (CI: 91.4 to 95.8). The difference between the two groups was not significant (p = 0.44). Although the final OKS and KSS-F were significantly better in the high activity group compared to the low activity group (OKS 45v40, KSS-F 95v78), there was no difference in the change in OKS or KSS-O. Conclusions High activity does not compromise the outcome of the Oxford UKR and may improve it. Activity should not be restricted nor considered to be a contraindication. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.knee.2015.08.001 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1770883924</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0968016015001702</els_id><sourcerecordid>1770883924</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-b14eceb631589919d089a1226776a66cd2eb6bab3c92171aa4f644b8a724eb383</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU9r3DAQxUVpaTZJv0APxdBLLnZHsi1LUFJK_jUQCKHtWcjymGpjWxtJDtlvHzmbtpBDToOk33uaeUPIRwoFBcq_rIvbCbFgQOsCRAFA35AVFU2Z1wLgLVmB5CJPJOyR_RDWAMBlVb8ne4w3tRA1W5GbU4ch0ybaexu3me57NDGLfzBzczRuTLV_Ol4_9M532TzZdLvRPo44RT1kSwuZx82gDS5X3w7Ju14PAT881wPy-_zs18mP_Or64vLk-1VuapAxb2mFBlte0lpISWUHQmrKUmcN15ybjqXHVrelkYw2VOuq51XVCt2wCttSlAfkaOe78e5uxhDVaIPBYdATujko2jQgRClZldDPL9C1m_2Uuluo9GklnwzZjjLeheCxVxtvR-23ioJaAldrtUyrlsAVCJUCT6JPz9ZzO2L3T_I34QR83QGYsri36FUwFieDnfUpatU5-7r_8Qu5GWzagR5ucYvh_xwqMAXq57LyZeO0TuoGWPkIdm6ldg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1771224938</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Does activity affect the outcome of the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Ali, Adam M ; Pandit, Hemant ; Liddle, Alexander D ; Jenkins, Cathy ; Mellon, Stephen ; Dodd, Christopher A.F ; Murray, David W</creator><creatorcontrib>Ali, Adam M ; Pandit, Hemant ; Liddle, Alexander D ; Jenkins, Cathy ; Mellon, Stephen ; Dodd, Christopher A.F ; Murray, David W</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background High levels of activity are considered to be a contraindication to unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) and are not recommended after UKR. To determine if these recommendations should apply to the mobile-bearing Oxford UKR, this study assessed the effect of post-operative activity level on the outcome of this device. Methods The outcome of the first 1000 Phase 3 cemented Oxford UKRs implanted between 1998 and 2010 was assessed using survival analysis, the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the American Knee Society Objective (KSS-O) and Functional (KSS-F) Scores. Patients were grouped according to the maximum post-operative Tegner Activity Score. Results The mean follow-up was 6.1 years (range 1 to 14). Overall, increasing activity was associated with superior survival (p = 0.025). In the high activity group, with Tegner ≥ 5 (n = 115) 2.6% were revised and the 12-year survival was 97.3% (confidence interval (CI): 92.0% to 99.1%). In the low activity group, with Tegner ≤ 4, (n = 885) 4.3% were revised and the 12-year survival was 94.0% (CI: 91.4 to 95.8). The difference between the two groups was not significant (p = 0.44). Although the final OKS and KSS-F were significantly better in the high activity group compared to the low activity group (OKS 45v40, KSS-F 95v78), there was no difference in the change in OKS or KSS-O. Conclusions High activity does not compromise the outcome of the Oxford UKR and may improve it. Activity should not be restricted nor considered to be a contraindication.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0968-0160</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5800</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2015.08.001</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26758852</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Activity level ; Adult ; Age ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods ; Confidence intervals ; Female ; Forecasting ; Humans ; Knee ; Knee Joint - diagnostic imaging ; Knee Joint - physiopathology ; Knee Joint - surgery ; Knee Prosthesis ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Orthopedics ; Osteoarthritis, Knee - diagnosis ; Osteoarthritis, Knee - physiopathology ; Osteoarthritis, Knee - surgery ; Patients ; Prosthesis Design ; Range of Motion, Articular - physiology ; Revisions ; Society ; Studies ; Surgery ; Survival analysis ; Treatment Outcome ; Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty ; Variance analysis</subject><ispartof>The knee, 2016-03, Vol.23 (2), p.327-330</ispartof><rights>Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>2015 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Mar 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-b14eceb631589919d089a1226776a66cd2eb6bab3c92171aa4f644b8a724eb383</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-b14eceb631589919d089a1226776a66cd2eb6bab3c92171aa4f644b8a724eb383</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2015.08.001$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3549,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26758852$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ali, Adam M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pandit, Hemant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liddle, Alexander D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jenkins, Cathy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mellon, Stephen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dodd, Christopher A.F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murray, David W</creatorcontrib><title>Does activity affect the outcome of the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement?</title><title>The knee</title><addtitle>Knee</addtitle><description>Abstract Background High levels of activity are considered to be a contraindication to unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) and are not recommended after UKR. To determine if these recommendations should apply to the mobile-bearing Oxford UKR, this study assessed the effect of post-operative activity level on the outcome of this device. Methods The outcome of the first 1000 Phase 3 cemented Oxford UKRs implanted between 1998 and 2010 was assessed using survival analysis, the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the American Knee Society Objective (KSS-O) and Functional (KSS-F) Scores. Patients were grouped according to the maximum post-operative Tegner Activity Score. Results The mean follow-up was 6.1 years (range 1 to 14). Overall, increasing activity was associated with superior survival (p = 0.025). In the high activity group, with Tegner ≥ 5 (n = 115) 2.6% were revised and the 12-year survival was 97.3% (confidence interval (CI): 92.0% to 99.1%). In the low activity group, with Tegner ≤ 4, (n = 885) 4.3% were revised and the 12-year survival was 94.0% (CI: 91.4 to 95.8). The difference between the two groups was not significant (p = 0.44). Although the final OKS and KSS-F were significantly better in the high activity group compared to the low activity group (OKS 45v40, KSS-F 95v78), there was no difference in the change in OKS or KSS-O. Conclusions High activity does not compromise the outcome of the Oxford UKR and may improve it. Activity should not be restricted nor considered to be a contraindication.</description><subject>Activity level</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Age</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods</subject><subject>Confidence intervals</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Forecasting</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Knee</subject><subject>Knee Joint - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Knee Joint - physiopathology</subject><subject>Knee Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Knee Prosthesis</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis, Knee - diagnosis</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis, Knee - physiopathology</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis, Knee - surgery</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Range of Motion, Articular - physiology</subject><subject>Revisions</subject><subject>Society</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Survival analysis</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty</subject><subject>Variance analysis</subject><issn>0968-0160</issn><issn>1873-5800</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU9r3DAQxUVpaTZJv0APxdBLLnZHsi1LUFJK_jUQCKHtWcjymGpjWxtJDtlvHzmbtpBDToOk33uaeUPIRwoFBcq_rIvbCbFgQOsCRAFA35AVFU2Z1wLgLVmB5CJPJOyR_RDWAMBlVb8ne4w3tRA1W5GbU4ch0ybaexu3me57NDGLfzBzczRuTLV_Ol4_9M532TzZdLvRPo44RT1kSwuZx82gDS5X3w7Ju14PAT881wPy-_zs18mP_Or64vLk-1VuapAxb2mFBlte0lpISWUHQmrKUmcN15ybjqXHVrelkYw2VOuq51XVCt2wCttSlAfkaOe78e5uxhDVaIPBYdATujko2jQgRClZldDPL9C1m_2Uuluo9GklnwzZjjLeheCxVxtvR-23ioJaAldrtUyrlsAVCJUCT6JPz9ZzO2L3T_I34QR83QGYsri36FUwFieDnfUpatU5-7r_8Qu5GWzagR5ucYvh_xwqMAXq57LyZeO0TuoGWPkIdm6ldg</recordid><startdate>20160301</startdate><enddate>20160301</enddate><creator>Ali, Adam M</creator><creator>Pandit, Hemant</creator><creator>Liddle, Alexander D</creator><creator>Jenkins, Cathy</creator><creator>Mellon, Stephen</creator><creator>Dodd, Christopher A.F</creator><creator>Murray, David W</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160301</creationdate><title>Does activity affect the outcome of the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement?</title><author>Ali, Adam M ; Pandit, Hemant ; Liddle, Alexander D ; Jenkins, Cathy ; Mellon, Stephen ; Dodd, Christopher A.F ; Murray, David W</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c509t-b14eceb631589919d089a1226776a66cd2eb6bab3c92171aa4f644b8a724eb383</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Activity level</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Age</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods</topic><topic>Confidence intervals</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Forecasting</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Knee</topic><topic>Knee Joint - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Knee Joint - physiopathology</topic><topic>Knee Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Knee Prosthesis</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis, Knee - diagnosis</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis, Knee - physiopathology</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis, Knee - surgery</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Range of Motion, Articular - physiology</topic><topic>Revisions</topic><topic>Society</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Survival analysis</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty</topic><topic>Variance analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ali, Adam M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pandit, Hemant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liddle, Alexander D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jenkins, Cathy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mellon, Stephen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dodd, Christopher A.F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murray, David W</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The knee</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ali, Adam M</au><au>Pandit, Hemant</au><au>Liddle, Alexander D</au><au>Jenkins, Cathy</au><au>Mellon, Stephen</au><au>Dodd, Christopher A.F</au><au>Murray, David W</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Does activity affect the outcome of the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement?</atitle><jtitle>The knee</jtitle><addtitle>Knee</addtitle><date>2016-03-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>327</spage><epage>330</epage><pages>327-330</pages><issn>0968-0160</issn><eissn>1873-5800</eissn><abstract>Abstract Background High levels of activity are considered to be a contraindication to unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) and are not recommended after UKR. To determine if these recommendations should apply to the mobile-bearing Oxford UKR, this study assessed the effect of post-operative activity level on the outcome of this device. Methods The outcome of the first 1000 Phase 3 cemented Oxford UKRs implanted between 1998 and 2010 was assessed using survival analysis, the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the American Knee Society Objective (KSS-O) and Functional (KSS-F) Scores. Patients were grouped according to the maximum post-operative Tegner Activity Score. Results The mean follow-up was 6.1 years (range 1 to 14). Overall, increasing activity was associated with superior survival (p = 0.025). In the high activity group, with Tegner ≥ 5 (n = 115) 2.6% were revised and the 12-year survival was 97.3% (confidence interval (CI): 92.0% to 99.1%). In the low activity group, with Tegner ≤ 4, (n = 885) 4.3% were revised and the 12-year survival was 94.0% (CI: 91.4 to 95.8). The difference between the two groups was not significant (p = 0.44). Although the final OKS and KSS-F were significantly better in the high activity group compared to the low activity group (OKS 45v40, KSS-F 95v78), there was no difference in the change in OKS or KSS-O. Conclusions High activity does not compromise the outcome of the Oxford UKR and may improve it. Activity should not be restricted nor considered to be a contraindication.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>26758852</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.knee.2015.08.001</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0968-0160 |
ispartof | The knee, 2016-03, Vol.23 (2), p.327-330 |
issn | 0968-0160 1873-5800 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1770883924 |
source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
subjects | Activity level Adult Age Aged Aged, 80 and over Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods Confidence intervals Female Forecasting Humans Knee Knee Joint - diagnostic imaging Knee Joint - physiopathology Knee Joint - surgery Knee Prosthesis Male Middle Aged Orthopedics Osteoarthritis, Knee - diagnosis Osteoarthritis, Knee - physiopathology Osteoarthritis, Knee - surgery Patients Prosthesis Design Range of Motion, Articular - physiology Revisions Society Studies Surgery Survival analysis Treatment Outcome Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty Variance analysis |
title | Does activity affect the outcome of the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T18%3A41%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Does%20activity%20affect%20the%20outcome%20of%20the%20Oxford%20unicompartmental%20knee%20replacement?&rft.jtitle=The%20knee&rft.au=Ali,%20Adam%20M&rft.date=2016-03-01&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=327&rft.epage=330&rft.pages=327-330&rft.issn=0968-0160&rft.eissn=1873-5800&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.knee.2015.08.001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1770883924%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1771224938&rft_id=info:pmid/26758852&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0968016015001702&rfr_iscdi=true |