No radiographic difference between patient-specific guiding and conventional Oxford UKA surgery

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

Volumn 23, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 1324-1329

  Kerens, Bart ^a   Schotanus, Martijn G M ^b   Boonen, Bert ^c   Kort, Nanne P ^b  

^a AZ Monica   (Belgium)

^b Sittard Geleen Heerlen   (Netherlands)

^c VIECURI MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Guiding; Oxford; Patient specific; Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Indexed keywords

AGED; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; JOINT DISEASES; KNEE; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT POSITIONING; PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; JOINT DISEASES; KNEE JOINT; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT POSITIONING; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 84892726107     PISSN: 09422056     EISSN: 14337347     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-2849-0     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Boonen B, Schotanus MG, Kort NP (2012) Preliminary experience with the patient-specific templating total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 83:387–393
2. Clarius M, Hauck C, Seeger JB, Pritsch M, Merle C, Aldinger PR (2010) Correlation of positioning and clinical results in Oxford UKA. Int Orthop 34:1145–1151
3. Jenny JY, Boeri C (2002) Accuracy of implantation of a unicompartmental total knee arthroplasty with 2 different instrumentations: a case–controlled comparative study. J Arthroplasty 17:1016–1020
4. Jenny JY, Boeri C (2003) Unicompartmental knee prosthesis implantation with a non-image-based navigation system: rationale, technique, case–control comparative study with a conventional instrumented implantation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 11:40–45
5. Jung KA, Kim SJ, Lee SC, Hwang SH, Ahn NK (2010) Accuracy of implantation during computer-assisted minimally invasive Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a comparison with a conventional instrumented technique. Knee 17:387–391
6. Keene G, Simpson D, Kalairajah Y (2006) Limb alignment in computer-assisted minimally-invasive unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 88:44–48
7. Koeck FX, Beckmann J, Luring C, Rath B, Grifka J, Basad E (2011) Evaluation of implant position and knee alignment after patient-specific unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 18:294–299
8. Kort NP, van Raay JJ, Cheung J, Jolink C, Deutman R (2007) Analysis of Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement using the minimally invasive technique in patients aged 60 and above: an independent prospective series. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15:1331–1334
9. Kort NP, van Raay JJ, van Horn JJ (2007) The Oxford phase III unicompartmental knee replacement in patients less than 60 years of age. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15:356–360
10. Parmaksizoglu AS, Kabukcuoglu Y, Ozkaya U, Bilgili F, Aslan A (2010) Short-term results of the Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for medial arthritis. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 44:135–142