Native Patella Retention Versus Resurfacing in a Cohort of Staged Bilateral Total Knee Patients

Authors

  • Justin M Head Michigan State University Statewide Campus Systems
  • Ryan Nelson
  • Mark Dyball
  • Bruce D Lawrence

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15438/rr.7.3.175

Keywords:

Total knee arthroplasty, patella resurfacing, native patella, bilateral total knee, anterior knee pain, patella retention

Abstract

Background: Patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty remains a point of controversy within the literature and the generally followed paradigm varies among regions.

Methods: In effort to elucidate a difference following the change from universal patellar resurfacing to universal non-resurfacing, 32 patients with bilateral TKA that included one resurfaced and one native patella were retrospectively reviewed at average follow up 21.4 months from the most recent surgery.

Results: No difference was observed in patient satisfaction, KOOS-ADL score, and VAS scores. No complications or secondary patellar resurfacing occurred.

Conclusions: Therefore, patients perceive no difference between knees with native patella retention or a resurfaced patella in regards to pain and function.

Author Biography

Justin M Head, Michigan State University Statewide Campus Systems

Department of Orthopedic Surgery

 

References

Walldius B. Arthroplasty of the knee joint using endoprosthesis. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 1957;24:1–112.

Schindler OS. The controversy of patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: Ibisne in medio tutissimus? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013;20:1227–44.

Mochizuki RM, Schurman DJ. Patella complications following total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg 1979;61A:879–83.

Insall JN, Lachiewicz PF, Burstein AH. The posterior stabilised prosthesis. A modification of the total condylar design. A two to four year clinical experience. J Bone Jt Surg 1982; 64A:1317–23.

Groeneveld HB.Total arthroplasty of the knee joint and the need for replacement of the patella. In: The medical engineering working party: total knee replacement. Mechanical Engineering Publications Limited, London, 1975 p.50–51.

Insall JN, Ranawat CS, Aglietti P, et al. A comparison of four models of total knee-replacement prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1976;58(6):754.

Clayton ML, Thirupathi R. Patellar complications after total condylar arthroplasty. Clin Orthop. 1982;170:152-5.

Aglietti P, Buzzi R, Gaudenzi A. Patellofemoral functional results and complications with the posterior stabilized total condylar knee prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 1988;3:17-25.

Goldberg VM, Figgie HE 3rd, Inglis AE, Figgie MP, Sobel M, Kelly M, Kraay M. Patellar fracture type and prognosis in condylar total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 1988;236:115-22.

Lombardi AV Jr, Engh GA, Volz RG, Albrigo JL, Brainard BJ. Fracture/dissociation of the polyethylene in metal-backed patellar components in total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988;70:675-9.

Lynch AF, Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB. Extensor mechanism complications following total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1987;2:135-40.

Helmy N, Anglin C, Greidanus NV, Masri BA. To resurface or not to resurface the patella in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008; 466 (11): 2775-83.

Clements WJ, Miller L, Whitehouse SL, Graves SE, Ryan P, Crawford RW. Early outcomes of patella resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 2010; 81 (1): 108-13.

Murray DW, MacLennan GS, Breeman S, Dakin HA, Johnston L, Campbell MK, et al. A randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different knee prostheses: the Knee Arthroplasty Trial (KAT). Health Tech Ass 2014;18(19):1-235.

Chen K, Li G, Fu D, Yuan C, Zhang Q, Cai Z. Patellar resurfacing versus nonresurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Int Orthop 2013; 37 (6): 1075-83.

Pavlou G, Meyer C, Leonidou A, As-Sultany M, West R, Tsiridis E. Patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: does design matter? A meta-analysis of 7075 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011; 93 (14): 1301-9.

Pavlou G, Meyer C, Leonidou A, As-Sultany M, West R, Tsiridis E. Patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: does design matter? A meta-analysis of 7,075 cases. J Bone Jt Surg 2011;93-A:1301–1309.

Burnett RS, Boone JL, Rosenzweig SD, Steger-May K, Barrack R L. Patellar resurfacing compared with nonresurfacing in total knee arthroplasty. A concise follow-up of a randomized trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91(11):2562-7.

Breeman S, Campbell M, Dakin H, Fiddian N, Fitzpatrick R, Grant A, et al. Patellar resurfacing in total knee replacement: five-year clinical and economic results of a large randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93(16):1473-81.

Group KATT, Johnston L, MacLennan G, McCormack K, Ramsay C, Walker A. The Knee Arthroplasty Trial (KAT) design features, baseline characteristics, and two-year functional outcomes after alternative approaches to knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91 (1): 134-41.

Ogon M, Hartig F, Bach C, Nogler M, Steingruber I, Biedermann R. Patella resurfacing: no benefit for the long-term outcome of total knee arthroplasty. A 10- to 16.3-year follow-up. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2002;122(4):229-34.

Abdel MP. Parratte S, and Budhiparama NC. The Patella in Total Knee Arthroplasty: To Resurface or Not Is the Question. Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 2014;7.2: 117-24.

Figgie HE III, Goldberg VM, Heiple KG, Moller HS III, Gordon NH. The influence of tibial-patellofemoral location on function of the knee in patients with the posterior stabilized condylar knee prosthesis. J Bone Jt Surg 1986;68:1035–40.

Robertsson O, Dunbar M, Phersson T, Knutson K, Lidgren L (2000) Patient satisfaction after knee arthroplasty: a report on 27,372 knees operated on between 1981 and 1995 in Sweden. Acta Orthop Scand 2000;71:262–7.

Roberts DW, Hayes TD, Tate CT, Lesko JP. Selective Patellar Resurfacing in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study. J Arthroplasty 2015;30:216–22.

Waters TS, Bentley G. Patellar Resurfacing in Total Knee Arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2003;85(2) 212-17.

Mockford BJ, Beverland DE. Secondary resurfacing of the patella in mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2005;20:898–902.

Barrack RL, Bertot AJ, Wolfe MW, Waldman DA, Milicic M, Myers L. Patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: A prospective randomised double blinded study with five to seven years of follow-up. J Bone Jt Surg 2001;83-A:1376–81.

Kwon OS, Bae DK. Comparative Analysis of Resurfaced and Unresurfaced Patella in Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty. J of Korean Northrop Assoc. 2003;38:478-483

Keblish PA, Varma AK, Greenwald AS. Patellar resurfacing or retention in total knee arthroplasty. A prospective study of patients with bilateral replacements. Bone & Joint Journal 1994;76-B(6)930-93

Burnett RS, Boone JL, McCarthy KP, Rosenzweig SD, Barrack RL. A prospective randomised clinical trial of patellar resurfacing and nonresurfacing in bilateral TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007;464:65–72.

Berger RA, Crossett LS, Jacobs JJ, Rubash HE. Malrotation causing patellofemoral complications after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998;356:144–53.

Incavo SJ, Wild JJ, Coughlin KM, Beynnon BD. Early revision for component malrotation in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007;458:131–136.

Incavo SJ, Coughlin KM, Pappas C, Beynnon BD. Anatomic rotational relationship of the proximal tibia, distal femur, and patella. J Arthroplasty 2003;18:643–648.

Liu ZT, Fu PL, Wu HS, Zhu Y. Patellar reshaping versus resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty—results of a randomized prospective trial at a minimum of 7 years’ follow-up. Knee. 2012 Jun;19(3):198-202.

Downloads

Published

2017-10-01

How to Cite

Head, J. M., Nelson, R., Dyball, M., & Lawrence, B. D. (2017). Native Patella Retention Versus Resurfacing in a Cohort of Staged Bilateral Total Knee Patients. Reconstructive Review, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.15438/rr.7.3.175

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 3 (2017)

Section

Original Article

License

Copyright (c) 2017 Justin M Head, Ryan Nelson, Mark Dyball, Bruce D Lawrence

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Copyright and License Agreement: 

Authors who publish with the Reconstructive Review agree to the following terms:

  • Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work. Reconstructive Review follows the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial CC BY-NC. This license allows anyone to download works, build upon the material, and share them with others for non-commercial purposes as long as they credit the senior author, Reconstructive Review, and the Joint Implant Surgery & Research Foundation (JISRF). An example credit would be: "Courtesy of (senior author's name), Reconstructive Review, JISRF, Chagrin Falls, Ohio". While works can be downloaded and shared they cannot be used commercially.
  • Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  • Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.