• 01865 307 528
  • 07889 443721
  • christine@oxfordorthopaedics.net
  • Manor Hospital, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7RP
  • Home
  • Reference Book
      • Unicompartmental Arthroplasty with the Oxford Knee
      • Preface
      • Chapter 1: Introduction and Historical Overview
      • Chapter 2: Design and Biomechanics of the Oxford Knee
      • Chapter 3: Mobility and Stability of the Intact and Replaced Knee
      • Chapter 4; Indications: Anteromedial Osteoarthritis
      • Chapter 5: Contraindications in Anteromedial Osteoarthritis
      • Chapter 6: Principles of the Oxford Operation
      • Chapter 7: Surgical technique: Cemented or cementless implantation with Microplasty instrumentation
      • Chapter 8: Medial Indications other than AMOA
      • Chapter 9: Postoperative Management and Radiography
      • Chapter 10: Clinical Results
      • Chapter 11: Management of Complications
      • Chapter 12: The Lateral Side
      • Appendix
  • Publications
  • Patient’s Area
  • Meet the Team
    • David_MurrayDavid Murray
    • Chris-Dodd2Christopher Dodd
    • John-O’ConnorJohn O’Connor
    • John GoodfellowJohn Goodfellow
    • Oxford-Knee-Fellows23Knee Fellows & Engineers
  • Contact
  • Home
  • Reference Book
    • Unicompartmental Arthroplasty with the Oxford Knee
    • Preface
    • Chapter 1: Introduction and Historical Overview
    • Chapter 2: Design and Biomechanics of the Oxford Knee
    • Chapter 3: Mobility and Stability of the Intact and Replaced Knee
    • Chapter 4; Indications: Anteromedial Osteoarthritis
    • Chapter 5: Contraindications in Anteromedial Osteoarthritis
    • Chapter 6: Principles of the Oxford Operation
    • Chapter 7: Surgical technique: Cemented or cementless implantation with Microplasty instrumentation
    • Chapter 8: Medial Indications other than AMOA
    • Chapter 9: Postoperative Management and Radiography
    • Chapter 10: Clinical Results
    • Chapter 11: Management of Complications
    • Chapter 12: The Lateral Side
    • Appendix
  • Publications
  • Patient’s Area
  • Meet the Team
    • David Murray
    • Christopher Dodd
    • John O’Connor
    • John Goodfellow
    • Knee Fellows & Engineers
  • Contact
Expand All Collapse All
  • 11: Management of Complications
    • Infection
    • Medial tibial plateau fracture
      • Treatment
    • Dislocation of a mobile bearing
      • Treatment
    • Loosening of a fixed component
    • Loosening of cementless components
    • Lateral compartment arthritis
    • Pain
      • Prevention and treatment
    • Limited motion
    • Recurrent haemarthrosis
    • Implant fracture
    • Results of revision surgery
    • References

Dislocation of a mobile bearing

25 views 0

This complication was introduced into surgery with the invention of mobile-bearing knee arthroplasty (Goodfellow et al, 1974). In the NJR, the incidence is reported as 1.2 revisions for dislocation/subluxation per 1000 component years (95% CI 1.05 – 1.37) for mobile bearing UKA. This dislocation rate may be low because surgeons may not consider dislocation to be a failure. In a meta-analysis of published or presented studies on Phase 3 OUKA, it is 0.73% (34 studies, total number of knees 10,125 and 74 dislocations at a mean follow up of 54 months [range 24-138 months]). In our 1000 Phase 3 cohort, the dislocation rate was 0.5%. Most dislocations occur early (Pandit et al, 2011).

Causes

Primary dislocations are usually caused by a combination of distraction of the joint and displacement of the bearing due to impingement. They are the most common type of dislocation. They occur early and are usually due to surgical error.

The following mistakes all increase the risk of dislocation (the mechanism of entrapment is explained in detail in Chapter 6).

1. Failure to remove osteophytes from the back of the femoral condyle causing impingement in flexion, stretching of the ligaments and anterior displacement of the bearing, particularly in patients who achieve high degrees of flexion.

2. Inequality of the 110° and 20° flexion gaps or MCL damage.

3. Retained cement protruding above the tibial plateau surface.

4. Femoral component (and therefore the bearing) sited too far from the lateral wall of the tibial component so that the bearing is free to rotate through 90°. This is unlikely to be a problem with anatomic bearings, which are now routinely used (see Fig. 6.14).

5. A bearing that is much too thin relative to gap width may, theoretically, dislocate, and beginners, fearful of dislocation, tend to insert the thickest bearing possible, but this is a mistake. ‘Overstuffing’ the knee should be avoided as it increases the risk of dislocation, pain and delayed recovery.

Secondary dislocation is the result of loss of entrapment from loosening (and subsidence) of the metal components. Spontaneous elongation of ligaments over time does not seem to occur unless there is impingement, when forced flexion or extension may stretch ligaments. Secondary dislocation is rare.

Traumatic dislocation has occasionally been encountered when a normally functioning OUKA has been forced into an extreme posture and the MCL has been momentarily stretched or damaged.

Diagnosis

Dislocation occurs when the knee is unloaded or at the moment when load is re-applied, for example rising from a chair or getting out of bed. It is usually a dramatic event and the patient seeks urgent advice, but dislocation can occur relatively silently. Walking may be resumed with the bearing displaced; the weight is borne (painlessly) through the opposed metal components.

Radiographs demonstrate the site of the displaced bearing, and may suggest its cause (e.g. osteophytes, retained cement, or displacement of a metal component).

Figure 11.6 (a) Anterior and (b) posterior dislocation of the bearing.

Since the anterior rim of the bearing is higher than its posterior rim, posterior dislocation requires more distraction of the joint than anterior dislocation (5 mm compared with 3 mm). Therefore, the displaced bearing is most commonly found in the anterior joint space, and occasionally in the suprapatellar pouch (Fig. 11.6(a)). Displacement into the posterior joint space (Fig. 11.6(b)) suggests that the bearing has rotated through 90° (point (2) above), from which position it is as easy for it to dislocate backwards as forwards as the entrapment has decreased to 2 mm. Introduction of the anatomical bearing has significantly reduced the incidence of posterior dislocation, as the long lateral side prevents bearing rotation. Occasionally, the bearing is found to be tilted into the intercondylar space where it may stabilise in a subluxed position (see Chapter 12).

Next >>

Was this helpful?

Yes  No
Related Articles
  • References
  • Results of revision surgery
  • Implant fracture
  • Recurrent haemarthrosis
  • Limited motion
  • Prevention and treatment
The Oxford Knee Replacement is the most widely used partial knee replacement worldwide. Replacing one side of the knee, unicompartmental knee replacement, tends to result in shorter hospital stays, fewer short-term complications, faster recovery and better knee function than total knee replacements.

© All rights reserved Oxford Knee Info 2025

.

Privacy Policy

Popular Search:ACL damage, physical signs