Article

Total knee replacement with and without patellar resurfacing: a prospective, randomised trial using the profix total knee system.

School of Surgery and Pathology (Orthopaedics) University of Western Australia, Gate 3, Verdun Street, Nedlands, Western Australia 6009, Australia.
The Bone & Joint Journal (Impact Factor: 2.8). 02/2008; 90(1):43-9. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B1.18986
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We have examined the differences in clinical outcome of total knee replacement (TKR) with and without patellar resurfacing in a prospective, randomised study of 181 osteoarthritic knees in 142 patients using the Profix total knee system which has a femoral component with features considered to be anatomical and a domed patellar implant. The procedures were carried out between February 1998 and November 2002. A total of 159 TKRs in 142 patients were available for review at a mean of four years (3 to 7). The patients and the clinical evaluator were blinded in this prospective study. Evaluation was undertaken annually by an independent observer using the knee pain scale and the Knee Society clinical rating system. Specific evaluation of anterior knee pain, stair-climbing and rising from a seated to a standing position was also undertaken. No benefit was shown of TKR with patellar resurfacing over that without resurfacing with respect to any of the measured outcomes. In 22 of 73 knees (30.1%) with and 18 of 86 knees (20.9%) without patellar resurfacing there was some degree of anterior knee pain (p = 0.183). No revisions related to the patellofemoral joint were performed in either group. Only one TKR in each group underwent a re-operation related to the patellofemoral joint. A significant association between knee flexion contracture and anterior knee pain was observed in those knees with patellar resurfacing (p = 0.006).

0 Bookmarks
 · 
66 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Anterior knee pain may occur after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Patellar resurfacing, which is considered to lower the incidence of anterior knee pain after TKA, remains controversial. In the present study clinical and radiological outcomes after TKA performed on patients with clinical and radiological signs of femorotibial and patellofemoral osteoarthritis (OA) with and without patellar resurfacing will be compared.Methods/design: Fifty patients will be included in a randomized controlled trial. Patients scheduled for TKA with clinical and radiological signs of femorotibial and patellofemoral OA will be included. Arthritis of the patellofemoral joint was determined based on the preoperative Baldini and Merchant X-ray views, which is assessed by the orthopaedic surgeon who treats the patient. Exclusion criteria are rheumatoid arthritis, history of patellar fracture, tuberosity transposition, high tibial osteotomy (HTO), hip arthroplasty and posterior cruciate ligament insufficiency. Patients will be randomized to undergo TKA either with or without patellar resurfacing. Outcomes will be assessed preoperatively, at 6 weeks and at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months postoperatively. Primary outcome measure is the patellofemoral scoring system according to Baldini. Secondary outcome measures are the Knee Society clinical rating system (KSS) and the Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Scale (KOOS) scores. Conventional weight-bearing radiographs, and views according to Baldini will be used to asses component loosening, wear, and patellofemoral problems including fracture or loosening of resurfaced patellae, subluxation and wear of non-resurfaced patellae.
    BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 10/2014; 15(1):358. · 1.90 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and purpose Resurfacing of the patella during primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is often recommended based on higher revision rates in non-resurfaced knees. As many of these revisions are insertions of a patella component due to pain, and since only patients with a non-resurfaced patella have the option of secondary resurfacing, we do not really know whether these patients have more pain and poorer function. The main purpose of the present paper was therefore to assess pain and function at least 2 years after surgery for unrevised primary non-resurfaced and resurfaced TKA, and secondary among prosthesis brands. Methods Information needed to calculate subscales from the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) was collected in a questionnaire given to 972 osteoarthritis patients with intact primary TKAs that had been reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Pain and satisfaction on visual analog scales and improvement in EQ-5D index score ΔEQ-5D) were also used as outcomes. Outcomes were measured on a scale from 0 to 100 units (worst to best). To estimate differences in mean scores, we used multiple linear regression with adjustment for possible confounders. Results We did not observe any differences between resurfacing and non-resurfacing in any outcome, with estimated differences of ≤ 1.4 units and p-values of > 0.4. There was, however, a tendency of better results for the NexGen implant as compared to the reference brand AGC for symptoms (difference = 4.9, p = 0.05), pain (VAS) (difference = 8.3, p = 0.004), and satisfaction (VAS) (difference = 7.9, p = 0.02). However, none of these differences reached the stated level of minimal perceptible clinical difference. Interpretation Resurfacing of the patella has no clinical effect on pain and function after TKA. Differences between the brands investigated were small and they were assumed to be of minor importance.
    Acta Orthopaedica. 03/2010; 81(1).
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Patella resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty is a contentious issue. The literature suggests that resurfacing of the patella is based on surgeon preference, and little is known about the role and timing of resurfacing and how this affects outcomes. Methods We analyzed 134,799 total knee arthroplasties using data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Hazards ratios (HRs) were used to compare rates of early revision between patella resurfacing at the primary procedure (the resurfacing group, R) and primary arthroplasty without resurfacing (no-resurfacing group, NR). We also analyzed the outcomes of NR that were revised for isolated patella addition. Results At 5 years, the R group showed a lower revision rate than the NR group: cumulative per cent revision (CPR) 3.1% and 4.0%, respectively (HR = 0.75, p < 0.001). Revisions for patellofemoral pain were more common in the NR group (17%) than in the R group (1%), and “patella only” revisions were more common in the NR group (29%) than in the R group (6%). Non-resurfaced knees revised for isolated patella addition had a higher revision rate than patella resurfacing at the primary procedure, with a 4-year CPR of 15% and 2.8%, respectively (HR = 4.1, p < 0.001). Interpretation Rates of early revision of primary total knees were higher when the patella was not resurfaced, and suggest that surgeons may be inclined to resurface later if there is patellofemoral pain. However, 15% of non-resurfaced knees revised for patella addition are re-revised by 4 years. Our results suggest an early beneficial outcome for patella resurfacing at primary arthroplasty based on revision rates up to 5 years.
    Acta Orthopaedica. 03/2010; 81(1).