Colin Y L Woon1, Alexander B Christ1, Rie Goto2, Kate Shanaghan1, Beth E Shubin Stein3, Alejandro Gonzalez Della Valle4. 1. Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, 10021, USA. 2. Kim Barrett Memorial Library, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA. 3. Sports Medicine Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA. 4. Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, 10021, USA. gonzaleza@hss.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are accepted treatments for end-stage isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis (PFOA). However, complications and re-operations have historically differed between the two procedures. We performed a systematic review to report on the re-operation rates between TKA and modern PFA for isolated PFOA. METHODS: Systematically identified publications reporting on patients that underwent either TKA or modern PFA for isolated PFOA were reviewed. Meta-analysis software was used to screen potential articles with at least one year follow-up that detailed reasons for re-operation. Data was extracted and analyzed for all re-operations. Survival of the implant was used as the primary outcome; return to the operating room (OR) for any reason was used as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: The weighted rate of either conversion or revision arthroplasty in the PFA group and the TKA group was 6.34 and 0.11, respectively. The weighted rate of return to the OR for bony and soft tissue procedures was 1.06 and 0.79, respectively. The weighted rate of manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) was 0.32 and 1.23, respectively. CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo PFA may be more likely to return to the operating room for conversion to TKA and/or revision surgery than those who undergo TKA.
PURPOSE:Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are accepted treatments for end-stage isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis (PFOA). However, complications and re-operations have historically differed between the two procedures. We performed a systematic review to report on the re-operation rates between TKA and modern PFA for isolated PFOA. METHODS: Systematically identified publications reporting on patients that underwent either TKA or modern PFA for isolated PFOA were reviewed. Meta-analysis software was used to screen potential articles with at least one year follow-up that detailed reasons for re-operation. Data was extracted and analyzed for all re-operations. Survival of the implant was used as the primary outcome; return to the operating room (OR) for any reason was used as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: The weighted rate of either conversion or revision arthroplasty in the PFA group and the TKA group was 6.34 and 0.11, respectively. The weighted rate of return to the OR for bony and soft tissue procedures was 1.06 and 0.79, respectively. The weighted rate of manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) was 0.32 and 1.23, respectively. CONCLUSION:Patients who undergo PFA may be more likely to return to the operating room for conversion to TKA and/or revision surgery than those who undergo TKA.
Entities:
Keywords:
Isolated patellofemoral arthritis; Isolated patellofemoral replacement; Total knee replacment
Authors: Christopher D Bernard; Ayoosh Pareek; Casey M Sabbag; Chad W Parkes; Aaron J Krych; Nancy M Cummings; Diane L Dahm Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2020-09-24 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Matthias J Feucht; Patricia M Lutz; Conrad Ketzer; Marco C Rupp; Matthias Cotic; Andreas B Imhoff; Jonas Pogorzelski Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2020-10-30 Impact factor: 3.067