Patellar resurfacing versus nonresurfacing in total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: experience at a tertiary care institution in Pakistan
Akil Fazal1, Riaz H Lakdawala2
1Clinical Fellow, NYU Hospital for Joint Disease, New York, US; 2Associate Professor and Chief, Section of Orthopedics, Department of Surgery, The Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan
Objective: To determine the effect of patellar resurfacing in patients offered total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis.
Design: Randomized control study.
Place and duration of study: The Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan from January 3, 2005 to January 9, 2010.
Patients and methods: Patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis were assigned to either the patellar resurfacing or nonresurfacing arm using systematic sampling. This consisted of patients undergoing unilateral and bilateral knee arthroplasty. Preoperatively, Knee Society Knee and Function Scores were calculated. After a minimum of 3 years postoperatively Knee Society Knee and Function Scores as well as the Clinical Anterior Knee Pain Rating were calculated and analysis done to check for differences.
Results: Seventy-five patients were recruited in each arm; 135 patients had bilateral and 15 had unilateral knee arthroplasty. The mean preoperative knee score was 40.4 for the resurfacing group and 40.60 for the nonresurfacing group (P = 0.45). This improved postoperatively to 93.67 and 94.23 respectively, with no difference between the two groups (P = 0.67). The mean preoperative function score was 45.50 for resurfaced patellae and 45.83 for nonresurfaced. This improved to 89.67 and 90.50, respectively, again with no difference (P = 0.51). Postoperative Clinical Anterior Knee Pain Rating was a mean of 0.1 for resurfaced and 0.13 for nonresurfaced patellas, with no difference on analysis (P = 0.06). However, patients who had bilateral knee arthroplasty had a slightly higher Clinical Anterior Knee Pain Rating than those who had single knee surgery (P = 0.046) irrespective of whether the patellar was resurfaced or not.
Conclusion: In patients undergoing primary Total Knee Arthroplasty for osteoarthritis, there is no added advantage of performing resurfacing of the patellar at 3 years of follow-up.
Keywords: patellar, patellar ligament, patellofemoral pain syndrome, arthroplasty subchondral, arthroplasy replacement knee, osteoarthritis knee, Pakistan
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF]
Other articles by this author:
Fourth-generation spinal instrumentation: experience with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis at a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan
Fazal A, Lakdawala RH
Published Date: 22 February 2012
Fazal A, Rashid H, Cheema T
Published Date: 24 January 2012
Readers of this article also read:
Carr ME, Tortella BJ
Published Date: 3 September 2015
Wyles CC, Houdek MT, Behfar A, Sierra RJ
Published Date: 28 August 2015
Relapsed Hodgkin lymphoma in adolescents: focus on current high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant
Guilcher GM, Stewart DA
Published Date: 8 May 2014
Orth P, Rey-Rico A, Venkatesan JK, Madry H, Cucchiarini M
Published Date: 16 January 2014
Pedersen DR, Goetz JE, Kurriger GL, Martin JA
Published Date: 12 February 2013
Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS
Published Date: 27 July 2012
Published Date: 8 December 2011
Niklas Schuelert, Fiona A Russell, Jason J McDougall
Published Date: 6 February 2011
Published Date: 17 September 2010
Characterization of complexation of poly (N-isopropylacrylamide-co-2-(dimethylamino) ethyl methacrylate) thermoresponsive cationic nanogels with salmon sperm DNA
Jim Moselhy, Tasnim Vira, Fei-Fei Liu, et al
Published Date: 24 August 2009