When used for appropriate indications, unicompartmental knee replacement is associated with fewer complications, faster recovery, and better function than total knee replacement. However, joint registries demonstrate a higher revision rate for unicompartmental knee replacement. Currently, most unicompartmental knee replacements are cemented; common reasons for revision include aseptic loosening and pain. These problems could potentially be addressed by using cementless implants, with coatings designed to improve fixation. The objectives of this study were to compare the quality of fixation as well as clinical outcomes of cemented and cementless unicompartmental knee replacements at five years of follow-up.
|Number of pages||8|
|Journal||Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume|
|Publication status||Published - 7 Aug 2013|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Orthopedics and Sports Medicine