Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) is an established procedure for the treatment of
unicompartmental arthritis. Success depends on a clear understanding of the
principles and kinematics of the knee. Restoration of the physiological axis
and soft tissue balancing is the key to a successful outcome. We outline the
basic principles of UKA and the role of computer assisted surgery in achieving
A. J. Price, et al., “Ten-Year in Vivo Wear Measurement of a Fully Congruent Mobile Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty,” The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, Vol. 87, No. 11, 2005, pp. 1493-1497.
D. W. Murray, J. W. Goodfellow and J. J. O’Connor, “The Oxford Medial Un-icompartmental Arthroplasty: A Ten-Year Survival Study,” The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, Vol. 80, No. 6, 1998, pp. 983-989.
U. C. Svard and A. J. Price, “Oxford Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. A Survival Analysis of an Independent Series,” The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, Vol. 83, No. 2, 2001, pp. 191-194.
J. L. Rees, et al., “Minimally Invasive Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthrop-lasty: Functional Results at 1 Year and the Effect of Surgical Inexperience,” Knee, Vol. 11, No. 5, 2004, pp. 363-367.
D. A. Fisher, M. Watts and K. E. Davis, “Implant Position in Knee Surgery: A Com-parison of Minimally Invasive, Open Unicompartmental, and Total Knee Arthroplasty,” Journal of Arthroplasty, Vol. 18, Suppl. 1, 2003, pp. 2-8. doi:10.1016/S0883-5403(03)00291-2
G. Keene, D. Simpson and Y. Kalairajah, “Limb Alignment in Comput-er-Assisted Minimally-Invasive Unicompartmental Knee Re-placement,” The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, Vol. 88, No. 1, 2006, pp. 44-48.
D. Paley and K. Tetsworth, “Mechanical Axis Deviation of the Lower Limbs. Preoperative Planning of Multiapical Frontal Plane Angular and Bowing Deformities of the Femur and Tibia,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, Vol. 280, 1992, pp. 65-71.
J. Y. Jenny and C. Boeri, “Unicompartmental Knee Prosthesis Implantation with a Non-Image-Based Navigation System: Rationale, Technique, Case-Control Comparative Study with a Conventional Instru-mented Implantation,” Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2003, pp. 40-45.