Sabrina M Strickland1, Mackenzie L Bird2, Alexander B Christ3. 1. The Patellofemoral Center, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA. StricklandS@HSS.edu. 2. Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, 70122, USA. 3. Division of Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To describe current indications, implants, economic benefits, comparison to TKA, and functional and patient-reported outcomes of patellofemoral arthroplasty. RECENT FINDINGS: Modern onlay implants and improved patient selection have allowed for recent improvements in short- and long-term outcomes after patellofemoral joint replacement surgery. Patellofemoral arthroplasty has become an increasingly utilized technique for the successful treatment of isolated patellofemoral arthritis. Advances in patient selection, implant design, and surgical technique have resulted in improved performance and longevity of these implants. Although short- and mid-term data for modern patellofemoral arthroplasties appear promising, further long-term clinical studies are needed to evaluate how new designs and technologies will affect patient outcomes and long-term implant performance.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To describe current indications, implants, economic benefits, comparison to TKA, and functional and patient-reported outcomes of patellofemoral arthroplasty. RECENT FINDINGS: Modern onlay implants and improved patient selection have allowed for recent improvements in short- and long-term outcomes after patellofemoral joint replacement surgery. Patellofemoral arthroplasty has become an increasingly utilized technique for the successful treatment of isolated patellofemoral arthritis. Advances in patient selection, implant design, and surgical technique have resulted in improved performance and longevity of these implants. Although short- and mid-term data for modern patellofemoral arthroplasties appear promising, further long-term clinical studies are needed to evaluate how new designs and technologies will affect patient outcomes and long-term implant performance.
Authors: Wayne B Leadbetter; Frank R Kolisek; Richard L Levitt; Andrew F Brooker; Patrick Zietz; David R Marker; Peter M Bonutti; Michael A Mont Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2008-12-05 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Pouya Akhbari; Tamer Malak; Sebastian Dawson-Bowling; Debra East; Kim Miles; P Adrian Butler-Manuel Journal: Clin Orthop Surg Date: 2015-05-18
Authors: Peter L Lewis; Francois Tudor; Michelle Lorimer; John McKie; Eric Bohm; Otto Robertsson; Keijo T Makela; Jaason Haapakoski; Ove Furnes; Christoffer Bartz-Johannessen; Rob G H H Nelissen; Liza N Van Steenbergen; Donald C Fithian; Heather A Prentice Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 4.755