Skip to main content

Table 3 Recent studies comparing UKA and TKA

From: Better short-term function after unicompartmental compared to total knee arthroplasty

Author Year study Study design Result
Tu et al. [16] 2020 121 UKA vs 35 TKA in theIsolated lateral OA, mean FU5.3 years retrospective,monocenter better postoperative Oxford Knee Score, Hospital for Special Knee Surgery score, range of motion, shorter length of hospitalization, and higher satisfaction rate in UKA
Liebensteineret al. [17] 2020 112 UKA vs. 330 TKA in medialOA retrospective,multicenter (registrydata) no significant differences between WOMAC and early or late ROM
Blevins et al.[18] 2020 150 UKA vs 150 TKA retrospective,monocenter, matched-pair UKA patients had less postoperative pain, earlier return to work, andhigher KSS
Hauer et al.[19] 2020 35 UKA vs 35 TKA, mean FU2.3 years retrospective,monocenter, matched-pair UKA better regarding Tegner Activity Scale and ROM, better results insubscales of Short-Form 36
Harbourneet al. [20] 2019 420 UKA vs 575 TKA, FU 12 months prospective,longitudinal cohortstudy, multicenter UKA patients more likely to return to desired activity
Lum et al.[21] 2018 650 UKA vs 1300 TKA inseverely obese patients, meanFU 2.3 years retrospective UKA with equal survivorship with substantially fewer reoperations,reduced deep infection, and less perioperative complications, severelyobese patients had improved Knee function scores
Miglioriniet al. [22] 2018 3254 UKA vs 10.649 TKA Meta-analysis UKA with better clinical and functional outcome, yet reducedsurvivorship
Goh et al.[23] 2018 160 UKA vs 160 TKA, patientsyounger than 55, mean FU 7 years prospective,multicenter, matched-pair no significant difference in Knee Society Score, Oxford Knee Score,and Short-Form 36; greater ROM in short-term (2 years)
Lombardiet al. [24] 2018 UKA vs TKA revision, n = 193,mean postoperative interval4.8 years retrospective,monocenter Re-revision rates after UKA revision equal to primary TKA and lowercompared to Re-revision TKA
Siman et al.[25] 2017 120 UKA vs 188 TKA, patientsolder than 75 in medial OA retrospective,monocenter UKA with shorter operative time and hospital stay, lowerintraoperative blood loss / transfusions, greater postoperative range ofmotion, higher level of activity at time of discharge, no difference inpostoperative KSS, or 5-year survivorship
Kulshresthaet al. [8] 2017 40 UKA vs 40 TKA, comparisonon early medial OA, FU 2 years prospective,randomized,monocenter UKA with similar improvement in patient-reported outcomes, function,and performance; UKA with shorter hospital stay and fewercomplications
van der Listet al. [26] 2017 166 UKA vs 63 TKA,comparison in medial OA,mean FU 3 years retrospective,monocenter better functional outcome in UKA, especially in younger patients andfemales
Lum et al.[27] 2016 201 UKA vs. 189 TKA, mean FU5.5 years retrospective,monocenter UKA with higher postoperative Knee Function Score, no differences inROM, revision rates without statistical differences
Shankar et al.[28] 2016 64 UKA vs 64 TKA, cost analysis retrospective,monocenter, matched-pair UKA with shorter operative time, hospital stay, lower transfusion rates,earlier discharge, overall lower direct and total cost
van der Listet al. [29] 2016 48 UKA vs 34 TKA, comparisonin lateral OA, mean FU 2.8 years retrospective,monocenter UKA with superior short-term functional outcome (WOMAC), especiallyin young patients and females
Fabre-Aubrespyet al. [30] 2016 101 UKA vs 101 TKA, patientsolder than 75, FU 5 years retrospective,monocenter, matched-pair UKA with better KSS, KOOS and Forgotten Knee score, similar 16 yrsurvivorship
Schwab et al.[31] 2015 105 UKA vs 105 TKA retrospective,monocenter, matched-pair lower blood loss and transfusion rates in UKA
  1. UKA Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty, TKA Total Knee Arthroplasty, OA Osteoarthritis, FU Follow-Up, WOMAC Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, ROM Range of Motion, KSS Knee Society Score