0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparing surgical strategies for end-stage anteromedial osteoarthritis : total versus unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims

          Treatment of end-stage anteromedial osteoarthritis (AMOA) of the knee is commonly approached using one of two surgical strategies: medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In this study we aim to investigate if there is any difference in outcome for patients undergoing UKA or TKA, when treated by high-volume surgeons, in high-volume centres, using two different clinical guidelines. The two strategies are ‘UKA whenever possible’ vs TKA for all patients with AMOA.

          Methods

          A total of 501 consecutive AMOA patients (301 UKA) operated on between 2013 to 2016 in two high-volume centres were included. Centre One employed clinical guidelines for the treatment of AMOA allowing either UKA or TKA, but encouraged UKA wherever possible. Centre Two used clinical guidelines that treated all patients with a TKA, regardless of wear pattern. TKA patients were included if they had isolated AMOA on preoperative radiographs. Data were collected from both centres’ local databases. The primary outcome measure was change in Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and the proportion of patients achieving the patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) at one-year follow-up. The data were 1:1 propensity score matched before regression models were used to investigate potential differences.

          Results

          The matched cohort included 400 patients (mean age 67 years (SD 9.55), 213 (53%) female, mean BMI 30.2 kg/m 2, 337 (84%) American Society of Anesthesiologists grade ≤ 2). We found a mean adjusted difference in change score of 3.02 points (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41 to 4.63; p < 0.001) and a significantly larger likeliness of achieving PASS (odds ratio 3.67 (95% CI 1.73 to 8.45); p = 0.001) both in favour of the UKA strategy.

          Conclusion

          UKA and TKA are both good strategies for treating end-stage AMOA. However, when compared as a strategy, UKA achieved larger improvements in OKS, and were more likely to reach the PASS value at one-year follow-up.

          Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(5):441–447.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations inR

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples

            The propensity score is a subject's probability of treatment, conditional on observed baseline covariates. Conditional on the true propensity score, treated and untreated subjects have similar distributions of observed baseline covariates. Propensity-score matching is a popular method of using the propensity score in the medical literature. Using this approach, matched sets of treated and untreated subjects with similar values of the propensity score are formed. Inferences about treatment effect made using propensity-score matching are valid only if, in the matched sample, treated and untreated subjects have similar distributions of measured baseline covariates. In this paper we discuss the following methods for assessing whether the propensity score model has been correctly specified: comparing means and prevalences of baseline characteristics using standardized differences; ratios comparing the variance of continuous covariates between treated and untreated subjects; comparison of higher order moments and interactions; five-number summaries; and graphical methods such as quantile–quantile plots, side-by-side boxplots, and non-parametric density plots for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups. We describe methods to determine the sampling distribution of the standardized difference when the true standardized difference is equal to zero, thereby allowing one to determine the range of standardized differences that are plausible with the propensity score model having been correctly specified. We highlight the limitations of some previously used methods for assessing the adequacy of the specification of the propensity-score model. In particular, methods based on comparing the distribution of the estimated propensity score between treated and untreated subjects are uninformative. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores.

              The Oxford hip and knee scores have been extensively used since they were first described in 1996 and 1998. During this time, they have been modified and used for many different purposes. This paper describes how they should be used and seeks to clarify areas of confusion.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: PhD Student
                Role: DPhil Student
                Role: Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon, Associate Professor
                Role: Professor
                Role: Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon, Professor
                Journal
                Bone Jt Open
                Bone Jt Open
                BJO
                Bone & Joint Open
                The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery (London )
                2633-1462
                24 May 2022
                May 2022
                : 3
                : 5
                : 441-447
                Affiliations
                [1 ] org-divisionDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Clinical Orthopaedic Research Hvidovre , org-divisionCopenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre , Copenhagen, Denmark
                [2 ] org-divisionNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Science , org-divisionUniversity of Oxford , Oxford, UK
                Author notes
                Correspondence should be sent to Mette Mikkelsen. E-mail: mette.mikkelsen.02@ 123456regionh.dk
                Article
                BJO-3-441
                10.1302/2633-1462.35.BJO-2021-0174.R1
                9134834
                35608354
                1bb28552-abe0-4c12-9d6e-39356aa9212c
                © 2022 Author(s) et al.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence, which permits the copying and redistribution of the work only, and provided the original author and source are credited. See https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History
                Categories
                Knee
                Total Blood Loss
                Oral Tranexamic Acid
                Randomized Controlled Trial
                Total Knee Arthroplasty
                Knee, knee
                bj1763, Basic science
                bj11416, Orthopaedic treatments
                bj1268, Arthroplasty
                bj11388, Orthopaedic diseases
                bj731, Anatomy
                bj8246, Knee
                bj9776, Medical specialists
                bj4445, Diagnostic and analytical techniques in orthopaedics
                bj1082, Anteromedial osteoarthritis
                bj17810, Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty
                bj17268, Total knee arthroplasty
                bj12079, Patient acceptable symptom state
                bj11697, Oxford knee score
                bj13232, Propensity score matching
                bj2108, Body mass index
                bj692, Anaesthesiologists
                bj13049, Preoperative radiography
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                $2.00
                Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Copenhagen, Denmark
                Knee
                A. Troelsen reports consultancy payments, a research support grant, payment for lectures including service on speakers bureaus, travel/accommodation/meeting expenses, and advisory board membership from Zimmer Biomet, unrelated to the study. A. J. Price reports consultancy payments from Zimmer Biomet, unrelated to the study. K. Gromov reports research support and institutional support grants from Zimmer Biomet, unrelated to the study.

                unicompartmental knee arthroplasty,knee replacement,patient-reported outcome measurement,oxford knee score,anteromedial osteoarthritis,unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (uka),total knee arthroplasty (tka),patient-acceptable symptom state (pass),oxford knee scores,propensity score matching,bmi,knee,anesthesiologists,preoperative radiographs

                Comments

                Comment on this article