Primary Arthroplasty| Volume 35, ISSUE 2, P353-357, February 2020

The Impact of Coronal Alignment on Revision in Medial Fixed-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Published:September 28, 2019DOI:



      To better define the optimal alignment target for medial fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), this study compares the postoperative mechanical alignment of well-functioning UKAs against 2 groups of failed UKAs, including revisions for progression of lateral compartment osteoarthritis (“Progression”) and revisions for aseptic loosening or subsidence (“Loosening”).


      From our prospective institutional database of 3351 medial fixed-bearing UKAs performed since 2000, we identified 37 UKAs revised for Progression and 61 UKAs revised for Loosening. Each of these revision cohorts was matched based on age at surgery, gender, body mass index, and postoperative range of motion with unrevised UKAs that had at least 10 years of follow-up and a Knee Society Score of 70 or greater without subtracting points for alignment (“Success” groups). Postoperative alignment was quantified by the hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle measured on long-leg alignment radiographs.


      The mean HKA angle at 4-month follow-up for the Progression group was 0.3° ± 3.6° of valgus compared to 4.4° ± 2.6° of varus for the matched Success group (P < 0.001). For the Loosening group, the mean HKA angle was 6.1° ± 3.1° of varus versus 4.0° ± 2.7° of varus for the matched Success group (P < 0.001).


      Patients with well-functioning UKAs at 10 years exhibited mild varus mechanical alignment of approximately 4°, whereas patients revised for progression of osteoarthritis averaged more valgus and those revised for loosening or subsidence averaged more varus. The optimal mechanical alignment for medial fixed-bearing UKA survival with contemporary polyethylene is likely slight varus.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to The Journal of Arthroplasty
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Weale A.E.
        • Murray D.W.
        • Baines J.
        • Newman J.H.
        Radiological changes five years after unicompartmental knee replacement.
        J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000; 82: 996-1000
        • Kennedy W.R.
        • White R.P.
        Unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee. Postoperative alignment and its influence on overall results.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987; 221: 278-285
        • Collier M.B.
        • Eickmann T.H.
        • Sukezaki F.
        • McAuley J.P.
        • Engh G.A.
        Patient, implant, and alignment factors associated with revision of medial compartment unicondylar arthroplasty.
        J Arthroplasty. 2006; 21: 108-115
        • Hernigou P.
        • Deschamps G.
        Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; 423: 161-165
        • Valenzuela G.A.
        • Jacobson N.A.
        • Geist D.J.
        • Valenzuela R.G.
        • Teitge R.A.
        Implant and limb alignment outcomes for conventional and navigated unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
        J Arthroplasty. 2013; 28: 463-468
        • Rosenberger R.E.
        • Fink C.
        • Quirbach S.
        • Attal R.
        • Tecklenburg K.
        • Hoser C.
        The immediate effect of navigation on implant accuracy in primary mini-invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2008; 16: 1133-1140
        • Vasso M.
        • Del Regno C.
        • D'Amelio A.
        • Viggiano D.
        • Corona K.
        • Panni A.S.
        Minor varus alignment provides better results than neutral alignment in medial UKA.
        Knee. 2015; 22: 117-121
        • Gulati A.
        • Pandit H.
        • Jenkins C.
        • Chau R.
        • Dodd C.A.F.
        • Murray D.W.
        The effect of leg alignment on the outcome of unicompartmental knee replacement.
        J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009; 91: 469-474
        • Kennedy J.A.
        • Molloy J.
        • Jenkins C.
        • Mellon S.J.
        • Dodd C.A.F.
        • Murray D.W.
        Functional outcome and revision rate are independent of limb alignment following Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019; 101: 270-275
        • Dyrhovden G.S.
        • Lygre S.H.L.
        • Badawy M.
        • Gøthesen Ø.
        • Furnes O.
        Have the causes of revision for total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasties changed during the past two decades?.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017; 475: 1874-1886
        • Epinette J.A.
        • Brunschweiler B.
        • Mertl P.
        • Mole D.
        • Cazenave A.
        • French Society for Hip and Knee
        Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty modes of failure: wear is not the main reason for failure: a multicentre study of 418 failed knees.
        Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012; 98: S124-S130
        • Zuiderbaan H.A.
        • van der List J.P.
        • Chawla H.
        • Khamaisy S.
        • Thein R.
        • Pearle A.D.
        Predictors of subjective outcome after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
        J Arthroplasty. 2016; 31: 1453-1458
        • Berry D.J.
        • Currier B.H.
        • Mayor M.B.
        • Collier J.P.
        Gamma-irradiation sterilization in an inert environment: a partial solution.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012; 470: 1805-1813
        • Colebatch A.N.
        • Hart D.J.
        • Zhai G.
        • Williams F.M.
        • Spector T.D.
        • Arden N.K.
        Effective measurement of knee alignment using AP knee radiographs.
        Knee. 2009; 16: 42-45
        • van Hamersveld K.T.
        • Marang-van de Mheen P.J.
        • Nelissen R.G.H.H.
        The effect of coronal alignment on tibial component migration following total knee arthroplasty.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019; 101: 1203-1212
        • Innocenti B.
        • Bellemans J.
        • Catani F.
        Deviations from optimal alignment in TKA: is there a biomechanical difference between femoral or tibial component alignment?.
        J Arthroplasty. 2016; 31: 295-301
        • Innocenti B.
        • Bilgen Ö.F.
        • Labey L.
        • van Lenthe G.H.
        • Vander Sloten J.
        • Catani F.
        Load sharing and ligament strains in balanced, overstuffed and understuffed UKA. A validate finite element analysis.
        J Arthroplasty. 2014; 29: 1491-1498
        • Chatellard R.
        • Sauleau V.
        • Colmar M.
        • Robert H.
        • Raynaud G.
        • Brilhault J.
        Société d’Orthopédie et de Traumatologie de l’Ouest (SOO). Medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: does tibial component position influence clinical outcomes and arthroplasty survival?.
        Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2013; 99: S219-S225
        • Bellemans J.
        • Colyn W.
        • Vandenneucker H.
        • Victor J.
        The Chitranjan Ranawat award: is neutral mechanical alignment normal for all patients? The concept of constitutional varus.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 470: 45-53