Literature DB >> 26762299

What Is the Frequency of Noise Generation in Modern Knee Arthroplasty and Is It Associated With Residual Symptoms?

Denis Nam1, Toby Barrack2, Ryan M Nunley2, Robert L Barrack2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prior investigations have recognized the presence of patient-perceived noise generation after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, questions remain regarding its overall frequency after both TKA and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) as well as with respect to its association with demographic and prosthesis-related factors and its association with patient-reported outcomes. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purposes of this study were (1) to determine the frequency with which patients report noise coming from the knee after TKA or UKA; (2) to identify patient and prosthesis-related factors associated with noise generation; and (3) to ascertain whether noise coming from the knee is associated with residual symptoms after knee arthroplasty.
METHODS: A five-center survey study was designed to identify patient-perceived noise and to quantify the degree of residual symptoms and functional deficits in patients after TKA or UKA. Data were collected by an independent, third-party survey center, which administered questions about residual symptoms, function, and pre- and postoperative activity levels. Patients meeting prespecified inclusion criteria were specifically questioned regarding perceived noises from their knee within the last 30 days; those who reported hearing noises sometimes, often, or extremely often were categorized as positive. We retrospectively identified 2671 patients who underwent TKA and 744 patients who underwent UKA and who met inclusion criteria; the final survey population included 1580 patients who underwent TKA and 476 patients who underwent UKA (68% response rate). TKA implant types included cruciate-retaining (59%), posterior-stabilized (16%), rotating-platform (13%), gender-specific (7%), and high-flex (5%). Differences in baseline demographic variables were accounted for using multiple logistic regression statistical analyses. Chi square analyses were used to compare the frequency of residual symptoms in those patients with and without noise generation.
RESULTS: Overall, 27% (557 of 2056; 95% confidence interval [CI], 25-29) of all patients undergoing knee arthroplasty reported hearing grinding, popping, or clicking from their operative knee in the last 30 days. Men (odds ratio [OR], 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.6; p = 0.02) and younger patients (χ2 [df = 7] = 67.3; p < 0.001) were more likely to report noise generation. After controlling for potential confounding variables, noise generation was more common after TKA (29%) than UKA (21%; OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-2.0; p < 0.001). Among TKA designs, the likelihood of noise generation was greater in posterior-stabilized (41%; OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.8-3.7; p < 0.001), rotating-platform (45%; OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.9-4.2; p < 0.001), and gender-specific (36%; OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2-3.2; p = 0.007) designs than in cruciate-retaining (23%) knees. Patient-perceived noise generation was associated with residual symptoms, including difficulty getting in and out of a chair (38% versus 25%, p < 0.001), limp (39% versus 25%, p < 0.001), swelling (42% versus 24%, p < 0.001), and stiffness (40% versus 23%, p < 0.001) compared with those who did not report noise generation after TKA.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients frequently perceive noises coming from the knee after arthroplasty, more so in TKA than UKA. Patients reporting noises from the knee were more likely to report functional limitations and the presence of a limp, swelling, and stiffness. Surgeons should inform patients preoperatively of this possibility, because unmet patient expectations are known to negatively impact patient satisfaction after surgery. Subsequent investigations should focus on determining if there is a causal relationship between noise generation and residual symptoms after knee arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 26762299      PMCID: PMC5174019          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-016-4701-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  24 in total

1.  Response rates and responsiveness for surveys, standards, and the Journal.

Authors:  Jack E Fincham
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2008-04-15       Impact factor: 2.047

2.  Comparison of surgical outcomes and implant wear between ceramic-ceramic and ceramic-polyethylene articulations in total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Derek F Amanatullah; Joshua Landa; Eric J Strauss; Jonathan P Garino; Sunny H Kim; Paul E Di Cesare
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 4.757

Review 3.  Squeaking in third- and fourth-generation ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty: meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Scott J C Stanat; James D Capozzi
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  New total knee arthroplasty designs: do young patients notice?

Authors:  Ryan M Nunley; Denis Nam; Keith R Berend; Adolph V Lombardi; Douglas A Dennis; Craig J Della Valle; Robert L Barrack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Incidence of 'squeaking' after ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Kenny Mai; Christopher Verioti; Kace A Ezzet; Steven N Copp; Richard H Walker; Clifford W Colwell
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  A comparison of the noise generated from different types of knee prostheses.

Authors:  James W Pritchett
Journal:  J Knee Surg       Date:  2012-07-13       Impact factor: 2.757

7.  Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not?

Authors:  Robert B Bourne; Bert M Chesworth; Aileen M Davis; Nizar N Mahomed; Kory D J Charron
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Arthroscopic treatment of patellar symptoms in posterior stabilized total knee replacement.

Authors:  J W K Wong; P W P Yau; P K Y Chiu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2002-04-06       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Impact of socioeconomic factors on outcome of total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Robert L Barrack; Erin L Ruh; Jiajing Chen; Adolph V Lombardi; Keith R Berend; Javad Parvizi; Craig J Della Valle; William G Hamilton; Ryan M Nunley
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Prevalence of cholesterol screening and high blood cholesterol among adults--United States, 2005, 2007, and 2009.

Authors: 
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2012-09-07       Impact factor: 17.586

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Noise around the Knee.

Authors:  Sang Jun Song; Cheol Hee Park; Hu Liang; Sang Jun Kim
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2018-02-27

2.  Influence of femoral implant design modification on anterior knee pain and patellar crepitus in patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty without patella resurfacing.

Authors:  Yi-Fan Huang; Yu-Hang Gao; Lu Ding; Bo Liu; Jian-Guo Liu; Xin Qi
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-06-09       Impact factor: 2.362

3.  Noise after total knee arthroplasty has limited effect on joint awareness and patient-reported clinical outcomes: retrospective study.

Authors:  Hiroto Taniguchi; Masafumi Itoh; Nobuyuki Yoshimoto; Junya Itou; Umito Kuwashima; Ken Okazaki
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 2.362

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.