Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences) ›› 2017, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (5): 861-866. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-167X.2017.05.021

• Article • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Unilateral patellar resurfacing in bilateral total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled study

WANG Jun-feng1, 2, LI Zhao1, ZHANG Ke-shi1, YUAN Feng1, LI Ru-jun1, ZHONG Qun-jie1, GUAN Zhen-peng1   

  1. 1. Arthritis Clinical and Research Center, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing 100044, China;
    2. Department of Orthopedics, Peking University International Hospital, Beijing 102206, China
  • Received:2015-11-16 Online:2017-10-18 Published:2017-10-18
  • Supported by:
    Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81371925)

Abstract: Objective: To perform unilateral patellar resurfacing and contralateral patellar retention in bilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKA) randomly, and to compare the clinical effects of patellar retention with patellar resurfacing in TKA. Methods: In the study, 14 bilateral knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients were randomized in the bilateral TKA to receive unilateral patellar resurfacing and contralateral patellar retention, including 28 knees, all were females, 53 to 78 years old, with average (66.9±7.8) years, and the BMI was (26.3±1.8) kg/m2. All subjects were followed up from 3 to 12 months. The clinical effects were evaluated based on measurements of American Knee Society score (KSS), range of motion (ROM), anterior knee pain, patellar clunk, and patellar tilt angle (PTA). Results: All the wounds healed primarily without significant complications, such as infection, aseptic loosening, patellar fracture and so on. The preoperative KSS scores of patellar resurfacing group were 38.9±22.2, and the scores changed to be 92.4±6.7 after operation, which were added by 53.5±20.3. While in the patellar retention group, the KSS scores were 38.4 ± 20.5 preoperatively, and after operation, which were added to be 92.1±4.2, and improved by 53.7±21.4. The differences in the changed KSS scores between TKA with and without patellar resurfacing were not statistically significant (Independent t-test, P=0.98). The ROM was changed from 95.4°±13.5° preoperatively to 120.4°±8.9° postoperatively in the patellar resurfacing group and from 92.9°±19.1° preoperatively to 120.4±8.4° postoperatively in the patellar retention group. The ROM of the two group were increased by 25.0°±14.5° and 27.5°±19.4° respectively. However, no remarkable differences were observed between the 2 groups in the knee ROM (Independent t-test, P=0.70). At the end of the latest follow-up, 3 knees in the patellar resurfacing group and 2 knees in the patellar retention group had knee anterior pain, the incidences of anterior knee pain were 21.4% and 14.3% respectively. There was no obvious difference for the incidence of post-operative anterior knee pain (Chi-square test, P=0.62). The incidences of post-operative patellar clunk in the 2 groups were all with 3 knees (21.4%), which had no significant difference in the 2 groups (Chi-square test, P=1.00). The post-operative PTA were 2.6°±2.6° in the patellar resurfacing group and 3.6°±2.9° in the patellar retention group, respectively. There was also no statistical difference between the 2 groups (Chi-square test, P=0.36). Conclusion: For knee OA patients with mild or moderate patellar cartilage damage, performing patellar resurfacing or not didn’t significantly affect anterior knee pain, patellar clunk, functional outcomes or patellar tracking after TKA. So we suggest retain patella in TKA for OA patients with mild or moderate patellar cartilage damage.

Key words: Total knee arthroplasty, Patellar resurfacing, Patellar retention

CLC Number: 

  • R687.4
[1] Rampersaud YR, Wai EK, Fisher CG, et al. Postoperative improvement in health-related quality of life: a national comparison of surgical treatment for focal (one- to two-level) lumbar spinal stenosis compared with total joint arthroplasty for osteoarthritis [J]. Spine J, 2011, 11(11): 1033-1041.
[2] Calvisi V, Camillieri G, Lupparelli S. Resurfacing versus non-resurfacing the patella in total knee arthroplasty: a critical apprai-sal of the available evidence [J]. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2009, 129(9): 1261-1270.
[3] Russell RD,Huo MH, Jones RE. Avoiding patellar complications in total knee replacement [J]. Bone Joint J, 2014, 96-B(11 Supple A): 84-86.
[4] Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, et al.Rationale of the knee society clinical rating system [J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1989, 248(248): 13-14.
[5] Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D, et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association [J]. Arthritis Rheum, 1986, 29(8): 1039-1049.
[6] Outerbridge RE. The etiology of chondromalacia patellae [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1961, 43-B: 752-757.
[7] Grelsamer RP, Bazos AN, Proctor CS. Radiographic analysis of patellar tilt [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1993, 75(5): 822-824.
[8] Goldring MB. Articular cartilage degradation in osteoarthritis [J]. Hss Journal, 2012, 8(1): 7-9.
[9] Arden N,Nevitt MC. Osteoarthritis: epidemiology[J]. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol, 2006, 20(1): 3-25.
[10] Nikolaou VS, Chytas D, Babis GC.Common controversies in total knee replacement surgery: current evidence [J]. World J Orthop, 2014, 5(4): 460-468.
[11] Burnett RS, Boone JL, McCarthy KP,et al. A prospective randomized clinical trial of patellar resurfacing and nonresurfacing in bilateral TKA [J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2007, 464: 65-72.
[12] Pavlou G, Meyer C, Leonidou A, et al. Patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: does design matter? A meta-analysis of 7 075 cases [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2011, 93(14): 1301-1309.
[13] Breeman S, Campbell M, Dakin H, et al. Patellar resurfacing in total knee replacement: five-year clinical and economic results of a large randomized controlled trial [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2011, 93(16): 1473-1481.
[14] Biedert RM, Sanchis-Alfonso V. Sources of anterior knee pain. Clin Sports Med, 2002, 21(3): 335-347.
[15] Lehner B, Koeck FX, Capellino S, et al. Preponderance of sensory versus sympathetic nerve fibers and increased cellularity in the infrapatellar fat pad in anterior knee pain patients after primary arthroplasty [J]. J Orthop Res, 2008, 26(3): 342-350.
[16] Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Booth RE Jr., et al. The patellar clunk syndrome. A complication of posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty [J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1989, 26(241): 203-208.
[17] Beight JL, Yao B, Hozack WJ, et al. The patellar “clunk” syndrome after posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty [J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1994, 299(299): 139-142.
[18] Ip D, Ko PS, Lee OB, et al. Natural history and pathogenesis of the patella clunk syndrome [J]. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2004, 124(9): 597-602.
[19] Camp CL, Bryan AJ, Walker JA, et al.Surgical technique for symmetric patellar resurfacing during total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg, 2013, 26(4): 281-284.
[1] WANG Xin-guang,GENG Xiao,LI Yang,WU Tian-chen,LI Zi-jian,TIAN Hua. Comparison of alignment and operative time between portable accelerometer-based navigation device and computer assisted surgery in total knee arthroplasty [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(4): 728-733.
[2] ZHAO Min-wei, WANG Ning, ZENG Lin, LI Min, ZHAO Zhong-kai, ZHANG Han, TIAN Hua . Comparision for clinical efficiency of continuous adductor canal block and femoral nerve block in total knee arthroplasty [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2017, 49(1): 142-147.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!