Abstract. Background. The primary objective of the study is to determine the function outcome and survivorship of
Despite the successful, durable results, concern remains for using TKA in patients with isolated patello-femoral OA, as it requires an extensive surgical exposure and bone resection, a long recovery time, and a potentially more complex revision than that required for a patient with a failed patello-femoral arthroplasty (PFA). PFA was introduced in the late 1970s. While PFA was successful in providing pain relief, the procedure did not gain widespread use because of initial design limitations that predisposed to PF maltracking, catching, and subluxation. The mechanical complications associated with first-generation PFA offset the potential advantages of maintaining the knee's native soft tissues and spurred efforts to improve implant design, and to refine surgical techniques and patient selection. Over the past two decades, second generation PFAs incorporated changes in implant design and instrumentation and have shown promising results when used in the properly selected patient population. In addition, with improved instrumentation and robotics, adequate implant alignment and rotation can be achieved in the majority of patients, including those with severe patellofemoral dysplasia. Our meta-analysis of TKA and PFA for the treatment of isolated patello-femoral OA showed that the rate of complications of patients undergoing PFA was 30% after a median follow up of 5.3 years, which is significantly higher than the 7% rate of complications in patients who underwent TKA. The most frequent type of complication associated with PFA was mechanical (including loosening and instability), which is consistent with the malalignment and maltracking-related failures previously reported. The incidence of re-operation after PFA (21%) was significantly higher than that seen after TKA (2%). The most frequent indication for re-operation after PFA was mechanical failure (7%), followed by progression of OA (6%), and persistent pain or stiffness (5%). The most common re-operations after PFA were conversion to TKA, revision of PFA components, lateral releases, open or arthroscopic debridement, manipulations under anesthesia, and bony and/or soft tissue extensor mechanism re-alignment procedures. In our study, 11% of patients treated with PFA underwent a revision arthroplasty, with 4% undergoing revision PFA and 7% undergoing conversion to TKA. Our comparison of patients who were treated with second-generation PFA designs versus TKA showed no difference in the rate of complications, re-operation, or revision arthroplasty. Additionally, length of follow-up did not significantly influence any of these outcomes when comparing second-generation PFA and TKA. These observations provide support for the use of current PFA designs. The mechanical complications and subsequent re-operations that affected first-generation PFA designs appear to be of less concern with proper patient selection, meticulous surgical technique, current implant designs and peri-operative care. While it is difficult to predict the survivorship of current PFA designs, it is our expectation that patient selection will continue to be a critical component in determining long-term results. The potential benefit of providing pain relief while preserving the tibiofemoral articulations makes PFA a promising treatment option.
Epidemiologic studies indicate that isolated patellofemoral (PF) arthritis affects nearly 10% of the population over 40 years of age, with a predilection for females. A small percentage of patients with PF arthritis may require surgical intervention. Surgical options include non-arthroplasty procedures (arthroscopic debridement, tibial tubercle unloading procedures, cartilage restoration, and patellectomy), and patellofemoral or total knee arthroplasty (PFA or TKA). Historically, non-arthroplasty surgical treatment has provided inconsistent results, with short-term success rates of 60–70%, especially in patients with advanced arthritis. Although TKA provides reproducible results in patients with isolated PF arthritis, it may be undesirable for those interested in a more conservative, kinematic-preserving approach, particularly in younger patients, who may account for nearly 50% of patients undergoing surgery for PF arthritis. Due to these limitations, patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) has become utilised more frequently over the past two decades. The ideal candidate for PFA has isolated, non-inflammatory PF arthritis resulting in “anterior” pain and functional limitations. Pain should be retro- and/or peri-patellar and exacerbated by descending stairs/hills, sitting with the knee flexed, kneeling and standing from a seated position. There should be less pain when walking on level ground. Symptoms should be reproducible during physical examination with squatting and patellar inhibition testing. An abnormal Q-angle or J-sign indicate significant maltracking and/or dysplasia, particularly with a previous history of patellar dislocations. The presence of these findings may necessitate concomitant realignment surgery with PFA. Often, patients with PF arthritis will have significant quadriceps weakness, which should be treated with preoperative physical therapy to prevent prolonged postoperative pain and functional limitations. Tibiofemoral joint pain suggests additional pathology, which may not be amenable to PFA alone.Introduction
Indications for PFA
Isolated patellofemoral arthritis is not an uncommon problem, with no clear consensus on treatment. Nonoperative and many forms of operative treatments have failed to demonstrate long-term effectiveness in the setting of advanced arthritis. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has produced excellent results, but many surgeons are hesitant to perform TKA in younger patients with isolated patellofemoral arthritis. In properly selected patients, patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) is an effective procedure with good long-term results. Contemporary PFA prostheses have eliminated many of the patellar maltracking problems associated with older designs, and short-term results, as described here, are encouraging. Long-term outcome and prospective trials comparing TKA to PFA are needed.
The aim of this study was to assess the increase in the anterior diameter of the knee and the impact of this increase on the range of motion and function of the knee. Twenty-eight patients (34 knees) who underwent Patello-femoral replacement with FPV (Wright Medical) prosthesis between 2005 and 2009 who were identified retrospectively and analyzed using chart and radiological review. Oxford and AKSS knee-scores were gathered prospectively pre-operative and at follow-up. Trochlear height was measured using lateral radiograph. Trochlear height was compared pre and postoperatively. Patellar height was also measured in preoperative and postoperative skyline view and was compared. The range of movement at six weeks and the Oxford and American knee society knee scores at six months postoperatively were noted. Association between increased anterior height and improved range of motion was studied. All but three-knees regained full knee extension. Postoperative mean range of flexion of the knee joint was 116 degrees. The mean Oxford knee and the mean American Knee Society Knee Scores significantly improved post-operatively The trochlear height was increased by 4mms. Patellar height was also increased by 3 mms resulting in average total increase of 7 mms in the anterior-posterior diameter of the knee. We found no relationship between range of motion of the knee and the increase in the anterior-posterior diameter. We found a negative correlation between increase in the antero-posterior and preoperative trochlear and patellar height. We conclude that FPV Patello-femoral replacement results in correct anatomical reconstruction of the trochlear height rather than ‘overstuffing’ of the patellofemoral joint which can lead to stiffness and failure of resolution of pain post-operatively. This should in turn result in durable improvements in pain and function.
The optimal treatment for isolated patello-femoral arthritis is unclear. Patello-femoral arthroplasty (PFA) may offer superior knee function in isolated patello-femoral osteoarthritis compare to TKA. The literature is controversial for patient outcomes in PFA. Some reports showed improved outcomes while others were disappointing. We assessed our outcomes to try to identify causes for poor outcomes. The Trent Arthroplasty was established in 1990 to collect prospective data on knee arthroplasty surgery. Data is entered by surgeons at the time of surgery, with patient consent. PFA constitute less than 1% of the arthroplasties performed in this region. Patients were sent self-administered outcome forms 1 year post-op. Re-operation and revision procedures were reported. 334 PFA have been registered from 17 hospitals. 79% were female patients with 43% of the patients aged 55 years or less, suggesting dysplasia as the cause of their osteoarthritis. Age range 28–94 yrs (SD 11.8 yrs). The implants were Stryker Avon 236, Corin Leicester 47, Link Lubinus 24, Smith & Nephew Journey 10, DePuy LCS 7, Wright FPV 2, other 8.Introduction
Methods
Introduction. The trochlea of a typical
INTRODUCTION. Patellofemoral joint (PFJ) replacement is a successful treatment option for isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis. With this approach only the involved joint compartment is replaced and the femoro-tibial joint remains intact. Minimizing periprosthetic bone loss, which may occur due to the stress shielding effect of the femoral component, is important to insure long-term outcomes. The objective of this study was to investigate, using finite element analyses, the effects of
It is important to remember that osteoarthritis is a noninflammatory condition that can affect 1, 2 or all 3 compartments of the knee. Moreover, this disease is a continuum from very mild to very severe involvement of the soft tissue, articular cartilage and bone. For this reason, a variety of nonsurgical and surgical options are indicated. The rheumatologist and/or orthopedist must understand the stage of the disease and fit that both to the pathology, age, activity level, and functional needs of the patient. For that reason, each of the options discussed today have an indication. The important issue about tricompartmental replacement is that we have improved technology and technique and the indications of today are broader than those of 20 years ago. Hopefully, they will continue to evolve both in terms of materials and instruments. The American Rheumatologic Association (ARA) has stated that joint replacement has been the major improvement in the care of the arthritic patient. The tricompartmental solution is the treatment of choice in patients with inflammatory arthritis such as rheumatoid arthritis as well as the solution in osteoarthritic patients with tricompartmental disease. There is an indication for osteotomy, unicompartmental replacement and perhaps
To progress to a same day surgery program for arthroplasty, it is important that we examine and resolve the issues of why patients stay in the hospital. The number one reason is fear and anxiety for the unknown and for surgical pain. The need for hospital stay is also related to risk arising from comorbidities and medical complications. Patients also need an extended stay to manage the side effects of our treatment, including after-effects of narcotics and anesthesia, blood loss, and surgical trauma. The process begins pre-operatively with an appropriate orthopaedic assessment of the patient and determination of the need for surgery. The orthopaedic team must motivate the patient, and ensure that the expectations of the patient, family and surgeon are aligned. In conjunction with our affiliated hospitalist group that performs almost all pre-admission testing, we have established guidelines for patient selection for outpatient arthroplasty. The outpatient surgical candidate must have failed conservative measures, must have appropriate insurance coverage, and must be functionally independent. Previous or ongoing comorbidities that contraindicate the outpatient setting include: cardiac – prior revascularization, congestive heart failure, or valve disease; pulmonary – chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or home use of supplemental oxygen; untreated obstructive sleep apnea – BMI >40 kg/m2; renal disease – hemodialysis or severely elevated serum creatinine; gastrointestinal – history or post-operative ileus or chronic hepatic disease; genitourinary – history of urinary retention or severe benign prostatic hyperplasia; hematologic – chronic Coumadin use, coagulopathy, anemia with hemoglobin <13.0 g/dl, or thrombophilia; neurological – history of cerebrovascular accident or history of delirium or dementia; solid organ transplant. Pre-arthroplasty rehabilitation prepares the patient for peri-operative protocols. Patients meet with a physical therapist and are provided with extensive educational materials before surgery to learn the exercises they will need for functional recovery. Enhancement of our peri-operative pain management protocols has resulted in accelerated rehabilitation. The operative intervention must be smooth and efficient, but not hurried. Less invasive approaches and techniques have been shown to decrease pain, reduce length of stay, and improve outcomes, especially in the short term. In 2014, 385 primary partial knee arthroplasty procedures (7