Background: Oxford-III unicompartmental knee replacements (UKRs) are among the most commonly used prostheses to treat isolated medial compartment osteoarthritis (OA). However, the best mode of implant fixation for primary UKRs remains a source of debate. The hypothesis of this study was that the biologically superior fixation of uncemented Oxford-III primary UKRs would translate into a lower revision rate when compared with cemented Oxford-III primary UKRs used to treat isolated medial compartment OA.
Methods: Data on all Oxford-III primary UKRs (n = 8,733) completed for isolated medial compartment OA from January 2000 to December 2018 were obtained from the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR). Revision rates were documented for each fixation type and analyzed for associations with patient sex and age at surgery. A multivariate Cox proportional-hazards analysis was completed to determine if type of fixation was an independent risk factor for revision of Oxford-III UKRs.
Results: Statistical analysis revealed a >1.8-fold greater revision risk for cemented Oxford-III UKRs compared with uncemented Oxford-III UKRs (p = 0.001) when considered independently of other risk factors. Furthermore, compared with uncemented fixation, cemented fixation was associated with a 2.9-fold (p < 0.001) increase in revision risk for women <65 years old and a 1.7-fold (p = 0.008) increase in revision risk for men 55 to 74 years old. There was no significant difference in the risk of revision between fixation methods for women ≥65 years old and men ≥75 years old.
Conclusions: We found that the type of fixation was an independent risk factor for revision of Oxford-III UKRs used in the treatment of isolated medial compartment OA. Uncemented Oxford-III primary UKRs had superior implant survivorship in women <65 years old and men 55 to 74 years old. Age and sex are important factors to consider when determining the type of fixation for Oxford-III primary UKRs used to treat isolated medial compartment OA.
Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.