Comparison of five-year clinical outcomes of 524 cemented and cementless medial unicompartmental knee replacements.

AIM: To compare the outcomes of cemented and cementless Unicompartmental Knee Replacements (UKR) at 5 years after surgery. METHODS: 262 cemented and 262 cementless medial mobile-bearing UKR, implanted by four high-volume surgeons using identical indications and surgical techniques, were reviewed by independent physiotherapists at 5 years. Survival, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), American Knee Society Score (AKSS), and EQ-5D-5L were assessed. The cementless cohort was mainly implanted after the cemented. Each cohort was divided into early and late sub-groups and compared, to assess if any differences were due to progressive improvement in surgical practice over time. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the cohorts for demographics, pre-operative scores, and 5-year revision (0.8%), re-operation (1.5%), and complication rates (5%). The cementless cohort had significantly better 5-year OKS (43v41, p = 0.008), AKSS-Objective (94v90, p = 0.049) and EQ-5D-5L (0.81v0.87, p = 0.0001). Pain sub-scores within OKS, AKSS, and EQ-5D-5L were also significantly better in the cementless cohort, and the differences were proportionally much greater and more significant than differences in their respective overall scores. There was no significant improvement in scores between the early and late subgroups of the cohorts, whereas the 'early-cementless' cohort had significantly better scores than the contemporaneously implanted 'late-cemented' cohort. This suggests that differences found were due to implant type, instead of improved surgical practice over time. CONCLUSION: Cementless UKR is associated with better clinical outcomes than cemented UKR, which is primarily due to improved pain relief. Both cemented and cementless UKR are safe with low reoperation and complication rates, and a 5-year survival of 99%.