Early failure of cement with loosening and dislocation of the femoral component in a unicompartmental knee replacement: a case report with microscopic assessment

Early failure of cement with loosening and dislocation of the femoral component in a unicompartmental knee replacement: a case report with microscopic assessment


  • Francesco Mancuso
  • Paolo Di Benedetto
  • Elia Colombo
  • Enrick Miani
  • Lorenzo Fedrizzi
  • Michele Mario Buttironi
  • Araldo Causero


UKA, UKA failure, UKA revision, Implant dislocation, UKA-to-TKA, Early failure



Medial unicompartimental knee artrhoplasty (UKA) is a valuable and well-known option in the treatment of medial osteoarthritis (OA). Early recovery and good results are usually reported. Failure mechanism include septic and mechanical loosening, bearing dislocation and lateral or patello-femoral joint OA evolution. The rare case of an atraumatic dislocation of the cemented femoral component of a UKA is presented together with a literature review and a microscopic analysis of the loosened component.


The case of a 60-years old man who suffered a UKA failure due to a complete loosening and migration of the cemented femoral component 5 months after its implantation is reported.

A review of the literature pertaining early similar catastrophic failures is discussed.

Furthermore a stereo-microscopic and scanning electronic microscopic evaluation of the femoral component was performed.


A UKA-to-TKA revision was performed. Septic loosening was ruled out and one-year follow up

showed patient satisfaction with good clinical and radiographic results.

Few cases of complete dislocation of the UKA femoral component are reported in the literature.

Macro- and microscopic evaluation showed an almost completely smooth surface at the cemented surface of the posterior condyle of the femoral component.



Whilst mobile bearing dislocation is a well-known complication of UKA, few cases of this potentially catastrophic complication are reported in the literature.

Early UKA failure with complete implant loosening may be determined by a suboptimal cementing technique with inadequate cement penetration into the trabecular bone.

In the present case, the absence of cement penetration into the posterior condyle may be one of the reason of the component dislocation after standing up starting with the knee in a highly flexed position.


Lombardi AV Jr, Berend KR, Walter CA, et al. Is recovery faster for mobile-bearing unicom-partmental than total knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009;467:1450–1457.

Liddle AD, Judge A, Pandit H, et al. Adverse outcomes after total and unicompartmental knee replacement in 101,330 matched patients: a study of data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Lancet 2014;384:1437-45.

Mittal A, Meshram P, Kim WH et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, an enigma, and the ten enigmas of medial UKA. J Orthop Traumatol 2020;21:15.

Kim KT, Lee S, Cho KH, Kim KS. Fracture of the medial femoral condyle after unicompart-mental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009;24(7):1143

Argelo KD, Burger MA, Hoozemans MJ, Temmerman OP. Femoral component failure in the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a case report. Journal of Medical Case Reports 2014;8:419.

Soufi M, Khunda A, Kalloo D, Patel K. A Traumatic Dislocation of a Unicondylar Knee Re-placement: A Case Report. Orthop Muscul Syst 2014;3:177.

Sierra RJ, Kassel CA, Wetters NG, Berend KR, Della Valle CJ, Lombardi AV. Revision of unicompartmental arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty: not always a slam dunk! J Arthroplasty 2013 Sep;28(8 Suppl):128-132.

Collier MB, Eickmann TH, Sukezaki F, McAuley JP, Engh GA. Patient, implant, and alignment factors associated with revision of medial compartment unicondylar arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2006;21(06, Suppl 2):108–115.

Vasso M, Corona K, D’Apolito R, Mazzitelli G, Schiavone Panni A. Unicompartmental Knee Ar-throplasty: Modes of Failure and Conversion to Total Knee Arthroplasty. Joints 2017;5:44–50.

Barrett MC, Wilkinson FO, Blom AW, Whitehouse MR, Kunutsor SK. Incidence, temporal trends and potential risk factors for aseptic loosening following primary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A meta- analysis of 96,294 knees. Knee 2021 Aug;31:28-38.

Saenz CL, McGrath MS, Marker DR, Seyler TM, Mont MA, Bonutti PM. Early failure of a uni-compartmental knee arthroplasty design with an all-polyethylene tibial component. Knee 2010;17:53-56.

Clarius M, Mohr G, Jaeger S, Seeger JB, Bitsch RG. Femoral fixation pattern in cemented Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty--an experimental cadaver study. Knee 2010 Dec;17(6):398-402.

Berend KR, George J, Lombardi AV Jr. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to total knee arthro-plasty conversion: assuring a primary outcome. Orthopedics 2009;32(09).

Khan Z, Nawaz SZ, Kahane S, Esler C, Chatterji U. Conversion of unicompartmental knee arthro-plasty to total knee arthroplasty: the challenges and need for augments. Acta Orthop Belg 2013; 79(06):699–705.

Jonas SC, Shah R, Mitra A, Deo SD. 5-Year cost/benefit analysis of revision of failed unicom-partmental knee replacements (UKRs); not “just” a primary total knee replacement (TKR). Knee 2014;21(04):840–842

Pandit H, Mancuso F, Jenkins C, Jackson WFM, Price AJ, Dodd CAF, Murray DW. Lateral uni-compartmental knee replacement for the treatment of arthritis progression after medial unicompart-mental replacement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017 Mar;25(3):669-674

Craik JD, El Shafie SA, Singh VK, Twyman RS. Revision of uni- compartmental knee arthroplas-ty versus primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2015;30(04):592–594

Cankaya D, Della Valle CJ. Blood loss and transfusion rates in the revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty are similar to those of primary total knee arthro- plasty but are lower compared with the revision total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2016;31(01):339–341.




How to Cite

Early failure of cement with loosening and dislocation of the femoral component in a unicompartmental knee replacement: a case report with microscopic assessment. Acta Biomed [Internet]. 2022 Mar. 10 [cited 2024 Jun. 15];92(S3):e2021574. Available from: https://www.mattioli1885journals.com/index.php/actabiomedica/article/view/12711

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 > >>