Revision of unicondylar knee arthroplasty: an analysis of failure rates and contributing factors
Abstract Background The implantation rate of knee arthroplasty and, in particular of unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA), is increasing, and revision is a feared complication. The aim of this study was to identify factors influencing aseptic and septic revision that are of high interest for establis...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2025-05-01
|
| Series: | Knee Surgery & Related Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-025-00276-3 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849730974307319808 |
|---|---|
| author | Dominik Szymski Josina Straub Nike Walter Yinan Wu Oliver Melsheimer Alexander Grimberg Volker Alt Arnd Steinbrueck Markus Rupp |
| author_facet | Dominik Szymski Josina Straub Nike Walter Yinan Wu Oliver Melsheimer Alexander Grimberg Volker Alt Arnd Steinbrueck Markus Rupp |
| author_sort | Dominik Szymski |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background The implantation rate of knee arthroplasty and, in particular of unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA), is increasing, and revision is a feared complication. The aim of this study was to identify factors influencing aseptic and septic revision that are of high interest for establishing preventive measures. Methods Data were collected using the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD). Patients with UKA were analyzed using the multiple Log-rank test with Holm’s method. Septic and aseptic revisions were calculated using Kaplan–Meier estimates. In total, 300,998 cases of knee arthroplasty were identified in the registry, and 36,861 patients with UKA were analyzed with a maximum follow-up of 7 years. Results The primary reason for UKA revision surgery was aseptic loosening (32.5%), particularly loosening of the tibial component (19.0%), followed by infection (11.0%) and the progression of arthritis (10.0%). Over 7 years, 8.7% of UKA procedures required revision, 7.8% for aseptic causes and 0.9% for infection. Risk factors for aseptic revision included uncemented implants [hazard ratio (HR) 1.38] and low annual surgical volume (fewer than 25 UKAs/year, HR 1.86; fewer than 50 UKAs/year, HR 1.43). Significant risks for septic revision were grade III obesity (HR 1.83), male sex (HR 1.69), and high comorbidity scores (Elixhauser > 5, HR 1.67). The surgical volume did not affect septic revision rates. Conclusion Aseptic loosening is the primary cause of UKA revision, influenced by implant type and low surgical volume, while septic revisions are associated with patient factors such as obesity, male sex, and comorbidities. Improvements in implant selection, surgical expertise, and patient risk management may reduce revision rates. Level of evidence III, retrospective case–control study. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-499a5e322d3b474a868eb7eb451ea8f1 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2234-2451 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-05-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Knee Surgery & Related Research |
| spelling | doaj-art-499a5e322d3b474a868eb7eb451ea8f12025-08-20T03:08:43ZengBMCKnee Surgery & Related Research2234-24512025-05-013711710.1186/s43019-025-00276-3Revision of unicondylar knee arthroplasty: an analysis of failure rates and contributing factorsDominik Szymski0Josina Straub1Nike Walter2Yinan Wu3Oliver Melsheimer4Alexander Grimberg5Volker Alt6Arnd Steinbrueck7Markus Rupp8Department of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Centre RegensburgDepartment of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Centre RegensburgDepartment of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Centre RegensburgDeutsches Endoprothesenregister gGmbH (EPRD)Deutsches Endoprothesenregister gGmbH (EPRD)Deutsches Endoprothesenregister gGmbH (EPRD)Department of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Centre RegensburgDeutsches Endoprothesenregister gGmbH (EPRD)Department of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Centre RegensburgAbstract Background The implantation rate of knee arthroplasty and, in particular of unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA), is increasing, and revision is a feared complication. The aim of this study was to identify factors influencing aseptic and septic revision that are of high interest for establishing preventive measures. Methods Data were collected using the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD). Patients with UKA were analyzed using the multiple Log-rank test with Holm’s method. Septic and aseptic revisions were calculated using Kaplan–Meier estimates. In total, 300,998 cases of knee arthroplasty were identified in the registry, and 36,861 patients with UKA were analyzed with a maximum follow-up of 7 years. Results The primary reason for UKA revision surgery was aseptic loosening (32.5%), particularly loosening of the tibial component (19.0%), followed by infection (11.0%) and the progression of arthritis (10.0%). Over 7 years, 8.7% of UKA procedures required revision, 7.8% for aseptic causes and 0.9% for infection. Risk factors for aseptic revision included uncemented implants [hazard ratio (HR) 1.38] and low annual surgical volume (fewer than 25 UKAs/year, HR 1.86; fewer than 50 UKAs/year, HR 1.43). Significant risks for septic revision were grade III obesity (HR 1.83), male sex (HR 1.69), and high comorbidity scores (Elixhauser > 5, HR 1.67). The surgical volume did not affect septic revision rates. Conclusion Aseptic loosening is the primary cause of UKA revision, influenced by implant type and low surgical volume, while septic revisions are associated with patient factors such as obesity, male sex, and comorbidities. Improvements in implant selection, surgical expertise, and patient risk management may reduce revision rates. Level of evidence III, retrospective case–control study.https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-025-00276-3KneeRevisionInfectionArthroplastyUnicompartimentalLoosening |
| spellingShingle | Dominik Szymski Josina Straub Nike Walter Yinan Wu Oliver Melsheimer Alexander Grimberg Volker Alt Arnd Steinbrueck Markus Rupp Revision of unicondylar knee arthroplasty: an analysis of failure rates and contributing factors Knee Surgery & Related Research Knee Revision Infection Arthroplasty Unicompartimental Loosening |
| title | Revision of unicondylar knee arthroplasty: an analysis of failure rates and contributing factors |
| title_full | Revision of unicondylar knee arthroplasty: an analysis of failure rates and contributing factors |
| title_fullStr | Revision of unicondylar knee arthroplasty: an analysis of failure rates and contributing factors |
| title_full_unstemmed | Revision of unicondylar knee arthroplasty: an analysis of failure rates and contributing factors |
| title_short | Revision of unicondylar knee arthroplasty: an analysis of failure rates and contributing factors |
| title_sort | revision of unicondylar knee arthroplasty an analysis of failure rates and contributing factors |
| topic | Knee Revision Infection Arthroplasty Unicompartimental Loosening |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-025-00276-3 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT dominikszymski revisionofunicondylarkneearthroplastyananalysisoffailureratesandcontributingfactors AT josinastraub revisionofunicondylarkneearthroplastyananalysisoffailureratesandcontributingfactors AT nikewalter revisionofunicondylarkneearthroplastyananalysisoffailureratesandcontributingfactors AT yinanwu revisionofunicondylarkneearthroplastyananalysisoffailureratesandcontributingfactors AT olivermelsheimer revisionofunicondylarkneearthroplastyananalysisoffailureratesandcontributingfactors AT alexandergrimberg revisionofunicondylarkneearthroplastyananalysisoffailureratesandcontributingfactors AT volkeralt revisionofunicondylarkneearthroplastyananalysisoffailureratesandcontributingfactors AT arndsteinbrueck revisionofunicondylarkneearthroplastyananalysisoffailureratesandcontributingfactors AT markusrupp revisionofunicondylarkneearthroplastyananalysisoffailureratesandcontributingfactors |