Literature DB >> 32112161

Manipulation under anesthesia as a therapy option for postoperative knee stiffness: a retrospective matched-pair analysis.

Daiwei Yao1, Frederik Bruns2, Sarah Ettinger3, Kiriakos Daniilidis4, Christian Plaass3, Christina Stukenborg-Colsman3, Leif Claassen3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Due to demographic changes, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most frequently performed orthopedic surgeries. Therapies for associated postoperative complications, such as postoperative knee stiffness (PKS), are becoming increasingly important. The aim of this retrospective matched-pair analysis was to evaluate mid-term-results following manipulation under anesthesia (MUA).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-one patients with PKS were evaluated and 51 matched-pair patients without PKS after primary TKA were chosen for the control group. In addition to the range of motion, the functionality was recorded by Knee Society Score (KSS), Western Ontario and Mc Masters Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Short-Form-12 Questionnaire (SF-12). Experience of pain was mapped using a 10-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), and the analgesic requirement was mapped using the WHO step scheme. A final follow-up examination was conducted approximately three years after TKA. To evaluate potential risk factors for the development of PKS, TKA alignment was measured via postoperative X-ray images.
RESULTS: Improvement of the average knee flexion of 35.7° and total flexion of 107.4° was detected in PKS patients after MUA. The flexion of the control group was 112.4°; no significant between-group difference was present regarding prosthesis type, sex, age and BMI. Regarding KSS, WOMAC, and SF-12, the MUA cohort achieved statistically-relevant lower overall scores than the control group, p = 0.006, p = 0.005, p = 0.001, respectively. Significantly higher experiences of pain and a higher need for analgesics in MUA patients were reported (p = 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Radiological evaluation of the prosthesis alignment did not show any differences between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: MUA can improve mobility after PKS, whereby MUA seemed to be a functional therapy option for PKS. Compared to the control group, the MUA group showed lower functional values and an increased experience of pain. A correlation between prosthesis malalignment and MUA could not be detected radiologically. Further studies are necessary to investigate the reasons for PKS.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Knee flexion; Manipulation under anesthesia; Mobility; Osteoarthritis; Postoperative knee stiffness; Total knee arthroplasty

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32112161     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-020-03381-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   3.067


  37 in total

1.  Health-related quality of life and appropriateness of knee or hip joint replacement.

Authors:  José M Quintana; Antonio Escobar; Inmaculada Arostegui; Amaia Bilbao; Jesús Azkarate; J Ignacio Goenaga; Juan C Arenaza
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2006-01-23

2.  Clinical, objective, and functional outcomes of manipulation under anesthesia to treat knee stiffness following total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Kimona Issa; Bhaveen H Kapadia; Mark Kester; Harpal S Khanuja; Ronald E Delanois; Michael A Mont
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  Outcomes after hip or knee replacement surgery for osteoarthritis. A prospective cohort study comparing patients' quality of life before and after surgery with age-related population norms.

Authors:  L M March; M J Cross; H Lapsley; A J Brnabic; K L Tribe; C J Bachmeier; B G Courtenay; P M Brooks
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  1999-09-06       Impact factor: 7.738

4.  The incidence and results of manipulation after primary total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Richard A Rubinstein; Alex DeHaan
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2009-08-06       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  Health related quality of life outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasties in a community based population.

Authors:  C A Jones; D C Voaklander; D W Johnston; M E Suarez-Almazor
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.666

6.  Health related quality of life in patients with total hip or knee replacement.

Authors:  R K Shields; L J Enloe; K C Leo
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 3.966

7.  Predictors of range of motion in patients undergoing manipulation after TKA.

Authors:  Harpreet S Bawa; Glenn D Wera; Matthew J Kraay; Randall E Marcus; Victor M Goldberg
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Factors influencing patient satisfaction two to five years after primary total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Cale A Jacobs; Christian P Christensen
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 4.757

9.  Patient satisfaction after posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty: a functional specific analysis.

Authors:  Hui Du; Hao Tang; Jian-Ming Gu; Yi-Xin Zhou
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2014-04-12       Impact factor: 2.199

10.  The epidemiology of revision total knee arthroplasty in the United States.

Authors:  Kevin J Bozic; Steven M Kurtz; Edmund Lau; Kevin Ong; Vanessa Chiu; Thomas P Vail; Harry E Rubash; Daniel J Berry
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-06-25       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  1 in total

1.  High range of motion in the first ten postoperative days after TKA does not predict superior outcome in the long run.

Authors:  Paul Köglberger; Alexander Wurm; Débora Coraça-Huber; Martin Krismer; Wilhelm Oberaigner; Michael Liebensteiner
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-03-25       Impact factor: 2.928

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.