Revision of isolated patellofemoral arthroplasty to total knee replacement

Modern Patellofemoral Arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

The ideal procedure for isolated patellofemoral arthritis is a controversial topic. Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) is an option that aims to restore normal kinematics to the knee while preserving bone. PFA has been shown to have benefits compared with total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in this patient population but has historically had a high failure rate. Revision rates are improving with modern implants and tight indications but still remain higher than TKA. This review summarizes current thinking around PFA using modern implants and techniques in 2023, provides an implant-specific analysis, and assesses how we can improve outcomes after PFA based on the current literature. The aim was to provide an outline of the evidence around PFA on which surgeons can make decisions to optimize patient outcome in this young and active population.

METHODS

Four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus) were searched for concepts of patellofemoral joint arthroplasty. After abstract and text review, a screening software was used to assess articles based on inclusion criteria for studies describing indications, outcomes, and techniques for isolated PFA using modern implants, with or without concomitant procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 191 articles were included for further examination, with 62 articles being instructional course lectures, systematic reviews, technique articles, narrative reviews, expert opinions, or meta-analyses. The remaining articles were case reports, trials, or cohort studies. Articles were used to create a thorough outline of multiple recurrent topics in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

PFA is an appealing option that has the potential to provide a more natural feeling and functioning knee for those with isolated PF arthritis. The high rate of revision is a cause for concern and there are several technical details that should be stressed to optimize results. The uncertain outcome after revision to TKA also requires more investigation. In addition, the importance of strict selection criteria and firm indications cannot be stressed enough to optimize longevity and attempt to predict those who are likely to have progression of tibiofemoral osteoarthritis. The development of new third-generation implants is promising with excellent functional outcomes and a much lower rate of maltracking and implant complications compared with earlier generations. The impact of these implants and improvement in surgical techniques on the revision rate of PFA will be determined from longer-term outcomes.

Patellar button compatibility in the conversion of Patellofemoral Arthroplasty to a Total Knee Arthroplasty: A review of the contemporary literature

BACKGROUND

Compared to total knee arthroplasty (TKA), patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) is a far less commonly performed operation. However, in carefully selected cohorts, PFA continues to be an appropriate treatment option for end-stage isolated patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis. In the later situation whereby a PFA is considered for conversion to a TKA - often due to disease progression - uncertainty remains regarding optimal management of the in situ patellar button. This review of the contemporary literature aimed to provide a summary of the current evidence to support surgeon decision-making, by evaluating the compatibility, efficacy, and survivorship of retained versus revised patellar buttons in PFA-to-TKA conversion. Specific focus was paid to implant design and technical considerations during revision, plus post-operative patient-reported outcomes and modes of secondary patellar component failure.

METHODS

A review of the Embase, Cochrane and PubMed databases was performed following PRISMA search principles.

RESULTS

This investigation highlights that the fate of patellar buttons in PFA-to-TKA conversion has previously been poorly studied, with scant publication data available. Most reports have been of singular cases or small cohort series. Larger formal RCTs and level 1 evidence are lacking.

CONCLUSION

The findings herein suggest that surgeons can confidently retain well-fixed, undamaged, dome-shaped all-polyethylene patellar buttons in the conversion of a PFA to TKA with the expectation of acceptable mid-term performance and survivorship, as long as congruent tracking with the new tibiofemoral components is achieved. This result is likely translatable to the majority of contemporary, all-polyethylene, dome-shaped patellar buttons, even with manufacturer mismatch.

Short-term Revision Risk of Patellofemoral Arthroplasty Is High: An Analysis from Eight Large Arthroplasty Registries

BACKGROUND

Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) is one option for the treatment of isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis, but there are limited data regarding the procedure and results. Because isolated patellofemoral arthritis is relatively uncommon, available case series generally are small, and even within national registries, sample sizes are limited. Combining data from multiple registries may aid in assessing worldwide PFA usage and survivorship.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We combined and compared data from multiple large arthroplasty registries worldwide to ask: (1) What proportion of patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty have PFA? (2) What are the patient and prosthesis characteristics associated with PFA in common practice, as reflected in registries? (3) What is the survivorship free from revision of PFA and what are the reasons for and types of revisions?

METHODS

Data were provided by eight registries that are members of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR) who agreed to share aggregate data: Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Sweden, Finland, Norway, the Netherlands, and the United States. De-identified data were obtained for PFA performed from either the beginning of year 2000, or the earliest recorded implantation date after that in each individual registry when PFA data collection commenced, up to December 31, 2016. This included patient demographics, implant use, all-cause revision rate (determined by cumulative percent revision [CPR]), and reasons for and type of revision.

RESULTS

During the data collection period, 6784 PFAs were performed in the eight countries. PFAs comprised less than 1% of primary knee replacements in all registries. Patient demographics were comparable in all countries. Patients were generally more likely to be women than men, and the mean age ranged from 50 years to 60 years. All registries showed a high rate of revision for PFA. The 5-year CPR for any reason ranged from 8.0% (95% CI 4.5 to 11.5) in Norway to 18.1% (95% CI 15.5 to 20.7) in the Netherlands. The most common reason for revision across all countries was disease progression (42%, 434 of 1034). Most PFAs (83%, 810 of 980) were revised to a TKA.

CONCLUSIONS

The revision risk of PFA in all registries surveyed was more than three times higher than the reported revision risk of TKA at the same times. The survivorship of PFA is similar to that of the no-longer-used procedure of metal-on-metal conventional hip replacement. Although there may be potential functional benefits from PFA, these findings of consistent and alarmingly high rates of revision should create concern, particularly as this procedure is often used in younger patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Revision following patello-femoral arthoplasty

PURPOSE

To describe the population of patients undergoing patello-femoral arthroplasty (PFA) revision and the reasons for which these implants are being revised. To compare this information with the observed failure patterns described in other national registries and with those seen for total knee replacement (TKR).

METHODS

Using data accessed from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales, we identified 4634 primary PFA implanted between 1 April 2003 and 30 June 2010. As of 1 July 2010, 195 PFAs had been revised. The epidemiology of PFA revision is described with specific emphasis upon the reasons for revision.

RESULTS

The median age at revision was 61 years (145 F:50 M). Revision occurred at a median of 2.0 years following primary surgery. Sixty of the 98 centres (61%) performing PFA revisions undertook only one such procedure. The 195 revisions were undertaken by 140 different consultants. Unexplained pain was the reason for revision in 46% of cases where a reason was stated. Progression of tibio-femoral arthritis was seen in only 14% of cases. Undiagnosed pain remained the most common reason for revision irrespective of patient age and time to revision, and was twice as common for PFA revision when compared to a matched group of failed TKR (43% vs. 19%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Unexplained pain is the principal indication for early revision of the failing PFA. The high proportion of revisions performed for unexplained pain raises questions about the adequacy of surgical selection for patients undergoing PFA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective comparative study, Level III.