Abstract
The aims of this work were to determine the complexity of surgery required to revise failed unicompartmental knee replacement and to evaluate the outcomes following revision. Most failed unicompartmental knee replacement cases could be revised without the need for stemmed implants, augmentation, or bone allograft. When bone loss occurred, it was commonly on the tibia side. Good functional outcome for the revised unicompartmental knee replacement was generally superior to the total knee replacement revision and in many cases comparable to primary knee replacement.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
