The Knee
Volume 16, Issue 6 , Pages 473-478, December 2009

Unicondylar knee arthroplasty in the UK National Health Service: An analysis of candidacy, outcome and cost efficacy

  • Charles A. Willis-Owen

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopaedics, Imperial College Academic Health Science Centre, Charing Cross Hospital, Fulham Palace Road, Hammersmith, London, W6 9NT, United Kingdom
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +44 2088461234; fax: +44 2088461439.
  • ,
  • Klaus Brust

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopaedics, Imperial College Academic Health Science Centre, Charing Cross Hospital, Fulham Palace Road, Hammersmith, London, W6 9NT, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • Helen Alsop

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopaedics, Imperial College Academic Health Science Centre, Charing Cross Hospital, Fulham Palace Road, Hammersmith, London, W6 9NT, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • Marisa Miraldo

      Affiliations

    • Imperial College Business School, Tanaka Building, South Kensington Campus, London, SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • Justin P. Cobb

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopaedics, Imperial College Academic Health Science Centre, Charing Cross Hospital, Fulham Palace Road, Hammersmith, London, W6 9NT, United Kingdom

Received 3 January 2009; received in revised form 8 April 2009; accepted 13 April 2009. published online 25 May 2009.

Abstract 

The viability of unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) as a stand-alone or temporising option for the management of gonarthrosis is a topic of considerable contention. Despite recent advances in prosthesis design and surgical technique, as well as mounting evidence of long-term survivorship, UKA remains infrequently used, accounting for just 8–15% of all knee arthroplasties. Instead this group is more typically managed using total knee arthroplasty (TKA). For UKA to warrant increased usage the candidacy for UKA must be prevalent, the outcome must be equivalent or superior to that of TKA, and the costs should be comparatively low. Here we address three issues regarding UKA: 1) a prospective assessment of the proportion of knees needing arthroplasty that are candidates for UKA; 2) retrospective outcome measures comparing TKA, UKA and controls; and 3) an estimation of the difference in costs between TKA and UKA from a hospital perspective. We show in a series of 200 knees that candidacy for UKA is widespread; representing 47.6% of knees. Furthermore, we also show for the first time, that not only is UKA functionally superior to TKA (based on Total Knee Questionnaire (TKQ) scores), but scores in medial and lateral UKA knees do not differ significantly from normal, non-operative age- and sex-matched knees (t=1.14 [38], p=0.163; and t=1.16 [38], p=0.255 respectively). Finally, we report that UKA offers a substantial cost saving over TKA (£1761 per knee) indicating that UKA should be considered the primary treatment option for unicompartmental knee arthritis.

Keywords: Unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA), Total knee arthroplasty (TKA), Outcome, Cost, Candidacy

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0968-0160(09)00077-5

doi:10.1016/j.knee.2009.04.006

The Knee
Volume 16, Issue 6 , Pages 473-478, December 2009