Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2023; 36(07): 759-766
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1742648
Original Article

Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Utilization among Early Career Surgeons: An Evaluation of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part-II Database

Christopher N. Carender 
1   Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
,
Kyle R. Duchman
1   Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
,
Alan G. Shamrock 
1   Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
,
Natalie A. Glass
1   Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
,
Timothy S. Brown
2   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Houston Methodist, Houston, Texas
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

An updated understanding of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) utilization is needed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate temporal trends in volume and utilization of UKA among early-career surgeons and to examine the influence of fellowship training status on utilization of UKA. The American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) Part-II database was queried from 2010 to 2019 to identify candidates who reported ≥1 total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or UKA. Self-reported history of fellowship training experiences was recorded. “High-volume” surgeons were defined as performing ≥7 UKA over the ABOS Part-II collection period. Trends were evaluated with the Cochrane–Armitage test and generalized linear models. From 2010 to 2019, a total of 2,045 candidates (28.1%) reported ≥1 TKA, while 585 candidates (8.0%) reported ≥1 UKA. The number of candidates reporting ≥1 UKA significantly increased (p = 0.001). An increase in UKA volume was observed over the study period (p < 0.001). Rates of utilization of UKA relative to TKA did not change significantly over the study period (p = 0.11). Sixty-three (2.4%) candidates met the study definition for high-volume UKA utilization. UKA procedure volume increased among ABOS Part-II candidates over the study period; however, rates of UKA utilization relative to TKA volume remained unchanged. Increasing volume of UKA performed by early-career surgeons is likely secondary to an increased number of surgeons trained in adult reconstruction. Only 2.4% of candidates who reported performing at least one knee arthroplasty procedure met the threshold for a high-volume UKA practice. Early-career surgeons should remain conscientious of UKA volume in their practice.

Keywords

unicompartmental knee arthroplasty - total knee arthroplasty - volume - early career - ABOS


Publication History

Received: 21 December 2020

Accepted: 09 December 2021

Article published online:
03 February 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Berend KR, Berend ME, Dalury DF, Argenson JN, Dodd CA, Scott RD. Consensus statement on indications and contraindications for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Surg Orthop Adv 2015; 24 (04) 252-256
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Kleeblad LJ, van der List JP, Pearle AD, Fragomen AT, Rozbruch SR. Predicting the feasibility of correcting mechanical axis in large varus deformities with unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (02) 372-378
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Pennington DW, Swienckowski JJ, Lutes WB, Drake GN. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in patients sixty years of age or younger. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85 (10) 1968-1973
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Zuiderbaan HA, van der List JP, Kleeblad LJ. et al. Modern Indications, results, and global trends in the use of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and high tibial osteotomy in the treatment of isolated medial compartment osteoarthritis. Am J Orthop 2016; 45 (06) E355-E361
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Heckmann N, Ihn H, Stefl M. et al. Early results from the american joint replacement registry: a comparison with other national registries. J Arthroplasty 2019; 34 (7S): S125-S34, 134.e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Baker P, Jameson S, Critchley R, Reed M, Gregg P, Deehan D. Center and surgeon volume influence the revision rate following unicondylar knee replacement: an analysis of 23,400 medial cemented unicondylar knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013; 95 (08) 702-709
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bini S, Khatod M, Cafri G, Chen Y, Paxton EW. Surgeon, implant, and patient variables may explain variability in early revision rates reported for unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013; 95 (24) 2195-2202
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Liddle AD, Pandit H, Judge A, Murray DW. Optimal usage of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a study of 41,986 cases from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B (11) 1506-1511
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Liddle AD, Pandit H, Judge A, Murray DW. Effect of surgical caseload on revision rate following total and unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2016; 98 (01) 1-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Badawy M, Espehaug B, Indrekvam K, Havelin LI, Furnes O. Higher revision risk for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in low-volume hospitals. Acta Orthop 2014; 85 (04) 342-347
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Murray DW, Liddle AD, Dodd CA, Pandit H. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: is the glass half full or half empty?. Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B (10, suppl A): 3-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Berry DJ, Bozic KJ. Current practice patterns in primary hip and knee arthroplasty among members of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons. J Arthroplasty 2010; 25 (6, suppl): 2-4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Abdel MP, Berry DJ. Current practice trends in primary hip and knee arthroplasties among members of the american association of hip and knee surgeons: a long-term update. J Arthroplasty 2019; 34 (7S): S24-S27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Duchman KR, Miller BJ. Are recently trained tumor fellows performing less tumor surgery? An analysis of 10 years of the ABOS Part II database. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2017; 475 (01) 221-228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Duchman KR, Westermann RW, Glass NA, Bedard NA, Mather III RC, Amendola A. Who is performing hip arthroscopy?: an analysis of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part-II database. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017; 99 (24) 2103-2109
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Eslam Pour A, Bradbury TL, Horst PK, Harrast JJ, Erens GA, Roberson JR. Trends in primary and revision hip arthroplasty among orthopedic surgeons who take the American Board of Orthopedics Part II examination. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31 (07) 1417-1421
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Pour AE, Bradbury TL, Horst P, Harrast JJ, Erens GA, Roberson JR. Trends in primary and revision knee arthroplasty among orthopaedic surgeons who take the American Board of Orthopaedics part II exam. Int Orthop 2016; 40 (10) 2061-2067
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Horst PK, Choo K, Bharucha N, Vail TP. Graduates of orthopaedic residency training are increasingly subspecialized: a review of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II database. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2015; 97 (10) 869-875
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Carender CN, Glass NA, Shamrock AG, Amendola A, Duchman KR. Total ankle arthroplasty and ankle arthrodesis use: an American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II database study. J Foot Ankle Surg 2020; 59 (02) 274-279
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Bolognesi MP, Greiner MA, Attarian DE. et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty among Medicare beneficiaries, 2000 to 2009. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013; 95 (22) e174
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Singh JA, Yu S, Chen L, Cleveland JD. Rates of total joint replacement in the united states: future projections to 2020-2040 using the national inpatient sample. J Rheumatol 2019; 46 (09) 1134-1140
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Nwachukwu BU, McCormick FM, Schairer WW, Frank RM, Provencher MT, Roche MW. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus high tibial osteotomy: United States practice patterns for the surgical treatment of unicompartmental arthritis. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (08) 1586-1589
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar