Patellar Resurfacing Does Not Improve Clinical Outcome in Patients with Symptomatic Tricompartmental Knee Osteoarthritis. An RCT Study of 40 Patients Receiving Primary Cruciate Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty

Meta-analysis of factors influencing anterior knee pain after total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a mature procedure recommended for correcting knee osteoarthritis deformity, relieving pain, and restoring normal biomechanics. Although TKA is a successful and cost-effective procedure, patient dissatisfaction is as high as 50%. Knee pain after TKA is a significant cause of patient dissatisfaction; the most common location for residual pain is the anterior region. Between 4% and 40% of patients have anterior knee pain (AKP).

AIM

To investigate the effect of various TKA procedures on postoperative AKP.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane from January 2000 to September 2022. Randomized controlled trials with one intervention in the experimental group and no corresponding intervention (or other interventions) in the control group were collected. Two researchers independently read the title and abstract of the studies, preliminarily screened the articles, and read the full text in detail according to the selection criteria. Conflicts were resolved by consultation with a third researcher. And relevant data from the included studies were extracted and analyzed using Review Manager 5.4 software.

RESULTS

There were 25 randomized controlled trials; 13 were comparative studies with or without patellar resurfacing. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the experimental and control groups (P = 0.61). Six studies were comparative studies of circumpatellar denervation vs non-denervation, divided into three subgroups for meta-analysis. The two-subgroup meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the experimental and the control groups (P = 0.31, P = 0.50). One subgroup meta-analysis showed a significant difference between the experimental and control groups (P = 0.001). Two studies compared fixed-bearing TKA and mobile-bearing TKA; the results meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the experimental and control groups (P = 0.630). Two studies compared lateral retinacular release vs non-release; the meta-analysis showed a significant difference between the experimental and control groups (P = 0.002); two other studies compared other factors.

CONCLUSION

Patellar resurfacing, mobile-bearing TKA, and fixed-bearing TKA do not reduce the incidence of AKP. Lateral retinacular release can reduce AKP; however, whether circumpatellar denervation can reduce AKP is controversial.

Different modalities of patellar management in primary total knee arthroplasty: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The primary management modalities for the patella in TKA include patellar resurfacing, patellar non-resurfacing, patellar resurfacing with denervation, and patellar non-resurfacing with denervation. Traditionally, meta-analyses have predominantly focused on examining comparisons between two management modalities. However, this study performed a network meta-analysis to compare all four patellar management interventions to identify the most optimal approach for patellar management in TKA.

METHODS

A computer-based search of PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), The Cochrane Library, Web of science, Embase, and MEDLINE databases was performed to identify randomized controlled trials focusing on the four management interventions for the patella in TKA. Comparisons included two-by-two comparisons as well as those involving more than two concurrent comparisons. The search timeframe spanned from inception to June 30, 2023. Two independent authors extracted the data and evaluated the quality of the literature. The Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias (ROB) tool was used to evaluate the overall quality of the literature. Subsequently, a network meta-analysis was conducted using the "gemtc" package of the R-4.2.3 software. Outcome measures such as anterior knee pain (AKP), reoperation rate, and patient satisfaction rate were evaluated using odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Additionally, the knee society score (KSS), function score (FS), and range of motion (ROM) were evaluated using mean differences (MD) with associated 95% CI. The different treatment measures were ranked using the surfaces under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA).

RESULTS

A total of 50 randomized controlled trials involving 9,283 patients were included in the analysis. The findings from this network meta-analysis revealed that patellar resurfacing exhibited significantly lower postoperative reoperation rate (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.24-0.63) and AKP (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.32-1) compared to non-resurfacing. Additionally, patellar resurfacing exhibited higher postoperative KSS clinical scores in comparison with non-resurfacing (MD: 1.13, 95% CI 0.18-2.11). However, for postoperative FS, ROM, and patient satisfaction, no significant differences were observed among the four management interventions.

CONCLUSION

Patellar resurfacing emerges as the optimal management modality in primary TKA. However, future studies should aim to reduce sources of heterogeneity and minimize the influence of confounding factors on outcomes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023434418 identifier: CRD42023434418.

Patellar resurfacing versus retention in cruciate-retaining and posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty

Aims

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the influence of patellar resurfacing following cruciate-retaining (CR) and posterior-stabilized (PS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) on the incidence of anterior knee pain, knee-specific patient-reported outcome measures, complication rates, and reoperation rates.

Methods

A systematic review of MEDLINE, PubMed, and Google Scholar was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) according to search criteria. Search terms used included: arthroplasty, replacement, knee (Mesh), TKA, prosthesis, patella, patellar resurfacing, and patellar retaining. RCTs that compared patellar resurfacing versus unresurfaced in primary TKA were included for further analysis. Studies were evaluated using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network assessment tool for quality and minimization of bias. Data were synthesized and meta-analysis performed.

Results

There were 4,135 TKAs (2,068 resurfaced and 2,027 unresurfaced) identified in 35 separate cohorts from 33 peer-reviewed studies. Anterior knee pain rates were significantly higher in unresurfaced knees overall (odds ratio (OR) 1.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20 to 2.83; p = 0.006) but more specifically associated with CR implants (OR 1.95; 95% CI 1.0 to 3.52; p = 0.030). There was a significantly better Knee Society function score (mean difference (MD) -1.98; 95% CI -1.1 to -2.84; p < 0.001) and Oxford Knee Score (MD -2.24; 95% CI -0.07 to -4.41; p = 0.040) for PS implants when patellar resurfacing was performed, but these differences did not exceed the minimal clinically important difference for these scores. There were no significant differences in complication rates or infection rates according to implant design. There was an overall significantly higher reoperation rate for unresurfaced TKA (OR 1.46 (95% CI 1.04 to 2.06); p = 0.030) but there was no difference between PS or CR TKA.

Conclusion

Patellar resurfacing, when performed with CR implants, resulted in lower rates of anterior knee pain and, when used with a PS implant, yielded better knee-specific functional outcomes. Patellar resurfacing was associated with a lower risk of reoperation overall, but implant type did not influence this.

Patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty leads to better isokinetic performance

BACKGROUND

For decades there have been concerns about patellar resurfacing (PR) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and the individual preference of the surgeon is still the main determinant of whether or not resurfacing is applied. According to preference, surgeons can be categorized in 3 main groups of those who usually, selectively, or rarely resurface. The aim of this prospective, randomized, controlled study was to compare the isokinetic performance and clinical outcome of TKAs with PR and without PR.

METHODS

A total of 50 patients scheduled to undergo TKA for primary osteoarthritis of the knee were randomly assigned to either the PR or non-PR groups. There were no significant differences between the groups in respect of age, BMI, gender and preoperative Knee Society Score (KSS) and isokinetic performance. Patients were evaluated at postoperative 3, 6, and 12 months with KSS and at 6 months and 1 year with isokinetic measurements.

RESULTS

The PR group had a higher mean score, especially in the functional component of KSS, but the difference was not statistically significant. Knee extension peak torque was significantly higher in the PR group at 6 months (p = 0.029) and 1 year (p = 0.004) postoperatively. There were no significant differences between the groups in respect of knee flexion peak torque values following TKA.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study demonstrated that PR during TKA is associated with better isokinetic performance and higher knee scores. These results support routine/usually resurfacing of the patella. For surgeons who selectively resurface the patella, the advantage of better isokinetic performance may be taking into consideration in favor of resurfacing the patella where they are undecided.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Patellar Resurfacing in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of 50 Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

During total knee arthroplasty, femur and tibia parts are regularly replaced, while resurfacing the patellar or not is an ongoing discussion. To compare revision rate, anterior knee pain rate, patient-reported outcome measures, complication, radiographic, and clinical outcomes after patellar resurfacing versus non-resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases were searched on 25 April 2021 to enroll randomized controlled trials that compared patellar resurfacing versus non-resurfacing. We used the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) framework to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcome was revision rate and secondary outcomes was anterior knee pain rate. Outcomes were pooled using the random-effect model and presented as risk ratio (RR), or mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Fifty studies (5586 knees) were included. Significant reductions in patellar revision rate (RR 0.41, 95% CI [0.19, 0.88]; P = 0.02; I²  = 24.20%) and non-patellar revision rate (RR 0.64, 95% CI [0.55, 0.75]; P < 0.001; I²  = 0%) were seen after patellar resurfacing. Patellar resurfacing significantly reduced the anterior knee pain rate than nonresurfacing (RR 0.72, 95% CI [0.57, 0.91]; P = 0.006; I²  = 69.5%). Significant differences in patient-reported outcome measures were found. However, these differences were inconsistent and lacked clinical importance. Patellar resurfacing resulted in a significant lower rate of patellar clunk (RR 0.58, 95% CI [0.38, 0.88]; P = 0.01; I²  = 0%), a higher patellar score (MD 1.24, 95% CI [0.67, 0.81]; P < 0.001; I²  = 73.8%), but prolonged surgical time (MD 8.59, 95% CI [5.27, 11.91]; P < 0.001; I²  = 88.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

The clear relationship is that patellar resurfacing reduces revisions, anterior knee pain, and patellar clunk. It will be interesting to compare the initial cost with the revision cost when required and cost-utility analysis with long-term results in future studies.

Clinical effectiveness of patellar resurfacing, no resurfacing and selective resurfacing in primary total knee replacement: systematic review and meta-analysis of interventional and observational evidence

Background

Patellar resurfacing is optional during total knee replacement (TKR). Some surgeons always resurface the patella, some never resurface, and others selectively resurface. Which resurfacing strategy provides optimal outcomes is unclear. We assessed the effectiveness of patellar resurfacing, no resurfacing, and selective resurfacing in primary TKR.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and bibliographies were searched to November 2021 for randomised-control trials (RCTs) comparing outcomes for two or more resurfacing strategies (resurfacing, no resurfacing, or selective resurfacing) in primary TKR. Observational studies were included if limited or no RCTs existed for resurfacing comparisons. Outcomes assessed were patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, and further surgery. Study-specific relative risks [RR] were aggregated using random-effects models. Quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.

Results

We identified 33 RCTs involving 5,540 TKRs (2,727 = resurfacing, 2,772 = no resurfacing, 41 = selective resurfacing). One trial reported on selective resurfacing. Patellar resurfacing reduced anterior knee pain compared with no resurfacing (RR = 0.65 (95% CI = 0.44–0.96)); there were no significant differences in PROMs. Resurfacing reduced the risk of revision surgery (RR = 0.63, CI = 0.42–0.94) and other complications (RR = 0.54, CI = 0.39–0.74) compared with no resurfacing. Quality of evidence ranged from high to very low. Limited observational evidence (5 studies, TKRs = 215,419) suggested selective resurfacing increased the revision risk (RR = 1.14, CI = 1.05–1.22) compared with resurfacing. Compared with no resurfacing, selective resurfacing had a higher risk of pain (RR = 1.25, CI = 1.04–1.50) and lower risk of revision (RR = 0.92, CI = 0.85–0.99).

Conclusions

Level 1 evidence supports TKR with patellar resurfacing over no resurfacing. Resurfacing has a reduced risk of anterior knee pain, revision surgery, and complications, despite PROMs being comparable. High-quality RCTs involving selective resurfacing, the most common strategy in the UK and other countries, are needed given the limited observational data suggests selective resurfacing may not be effective over other strategies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05877-7.

Rare primary patellar resurfacing does not lead to more secondary patellar resurfacing: analysis of 70,014 primary total knee arthroplasties in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Current literature provides no conclusive evidence in support of a patellar resurfacing vs. non-resurfacing regime. Therefore, we compared the incidence of secondary patellar resurfacing among hospitals using 3 different primary patellar resurfacing regimes in the Netherlands. Secondarily we identified patient and surgical characteristics associated with primary patellar resurfacing and secondary patella resurfacing following non-resurfaced primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used data from 2014-2016 of the Dutch Arthroplasty Register. Hospitals were divided into rare (0-10%), selective (>10% to 90%), and usually primary patellar resurfacing (>90%) regimes. We performed a logistic regression analysis for associated factors of primary patellar resurfacing in the selective resurfacing subgroup and for secondary patellar resurfacing in the rare resurfacing subgroup.

RESULTS

The rate of primary resurfacing was 5.2% for the rare and 36% for the selective patellar resurfacing regimes, with similar secondary patellar resurfacing (1.1% vs. 0.9%). Predictors for primary patellar resurfacing were being female (OR 1.3) and younger (50-59 years, OR 1.4). The PS prosthesis design had a higher OR (4.1) than the CR design. Younger age (50-59 years, OR 1.5) and PS prosthesis (OR 2.7) were significant predictors of secondary patellar resurfacing. Particular surgical systems have a higher rate of primary and secondary patellar resurfacing.

INTERPRETATION

Low rates of secondary patellar resurfacing in hospitals with a rare resurfacing regime indicate that this regime does not lead to more secondary patellar resurfacing then selective resurfacing. In the Dutch orthopedic community primary and secondary patellar resurfacing is associated with using a posterior stabilizing design, being younger, and using particular TKA systems.

Patellar resurfacing versus nonresurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Whether resurface the patella or not in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was controversial. In 2013, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RTCs). After that, plenty of studies have been carried out, but there still existed a great deal of controversy. In order to update our previous study, we conducted this update meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of patellar resurfacing in TKA.

METHODS

Databases were searched for RCTs comparing the outcomes of patellar resurfacing and nonresurfacing in TKA. Outcomes of knee relevant indicators were analysed. To see the short- and long-term effects, we calculated the data in total and divided the patients who were followed up for ≤ 3 years and ≥ 5 years into two subgroups as well.

RESULTS

Thirty-two trials assessing 6887 knees were eligible. There was a significant difference in terms of reoperation (in total and ≥ 5 years), Knee Society Score (KSS), function score (in total and ≥ 5 years) and noise. While no significant difference was found in the following items: reoperation (≤ 3 years), anterior knee pain (AKP), function score (≤ 3 years), range of motion (ROM), Oxford score, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), visual analogue score (VAS), Feller score, patellar tilt and the patients' satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that patellar resurfacing could reduce the occurrence of reoperation and noise after surgery, as well as increase the KSS and function score, while it might not influence the outcomes such as AKP, ROM, Oxford score, KOOS, VAS, Feller score, patellar tilt and the patients' satisfaction. The results are different from our previous finding in the meta-analysis. In conclusion, we prefer patellar resurfacing in TKA.