Midterm outcomes of patellofemoral arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is the evaluation of the patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) survival and clinical and radiological outcomes in our institution.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation of our institution patellofemoral arthroplasty cases from 2006 to 2018 was performed; the n sample after applying exclusion and inclusion criteria was 21. All patients excepting one were female with a median age of 63 (20-78). A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis at ten years was calculated. Informed consent was obtained from all patients prior being included in the study.

RESULTS

The total revision rate was 6 out of 21 patients (28.57%). The progression of the osteoarthritis in the tibiofemoral compartment was the main cause (50% of revision surgeries). The degree of satisfaction with the PFA was high, with a mean Kujala score of 70.09 and a mean OKS of 35.45 points. The VAS score improved significantly (P<.001) from a preoperative mean of 8.07 to a postoperative mean of 3.45, with an average improvement of 5 (2-8). Survival at 10 years, with revision for any reason as the endpoint, was 73.5%. A significant positive correlation between BMI and the WOMAC pain (r=.72, P<.01) and between BMI and the post-operative VAS (r=.67, P<.01) was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the case series under consideration suggest that PFA could be a possibility in the joint preservation surgery on the isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis. BMI >30 seems to be a negative predictor factor in relationship with the postoperative satisfaction, increasing the pain proportionally to this index and requiring more replacement surgery than patients with BMI <30. Meanwhile the radiologic parameters of the implant are not correlated with the clinical or functional outcomes.

Midterm outcomes of patellofemoral arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is the evaluation of the patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) survival and clinical and radiological outcomes in our institution.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation of our institution patellofemoral arthroplasty cases from 2006 to 2018 was performed; the n sample after applying exclusion and inclusion criteria was 21. All patients excepting one were female with a median age of 63 (20-78). A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis at ten years was calculated. Informed consent was obtained from all patients prior being included in the study.

RESULTS

The total revision rate was 6 out of 21 patients (28.57%). The progression of the osteoarthritis in the tibiofemoral compartment was the main cause (50% of revision surgeries). The degree of satisfaction with the PFA was high, with a mean Kujala score of 70.09 and a mean OKS of 35.45 points. The VAS score improved significantly (p<0.001) from a preoperative mean of 8.07 to a postoperative mean of 3.45, with an average improvement of 5 (2-8). Survival at 10 years, with revision for any reason as the endpoint, was 73.5%. A significant positive correlation between BMI and the WOMAC pain (r=0.72, p<0.01) and between BMI and the post-operative VAS (r=0.67, p<0.01) was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the case series under consideration suggest that PFA could be a possibility in the joint preservation surgery on the isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis. BMI >30 seems to be a negative predictor factor in relationship with the postoperative satisfaction, increasing the pain proportionally to this index and requiring more replacement surgery than patients with BMI <30. Meanwhile the radiologic parameters of the implant are not correlated with the clinical or functional outcomes.

Patellar tendon shortening following patellofemoral joint replacement

PURPOSE

Patellar tendon shortening may occur following patellofemoral joint replacement (PFJR). We hypothesized that patellar tendon shortening results in unfavourable patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The aim of this study was to determine the effect of patellar tendon shortening following PFJR on PROs.

METHODS

In this substudy of a prospective cohort study, a total of 108 patients with isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis underwent 124 patellofemoral joint replacements. We measured both patellar tendon length and length of the patella on pre-operative radiographs, and on radiographs acquired at eight weeks and at one year post-operative. More than 10% decrease in patellar tendon length relative to the pre-operative patellar tendon length was defined as patellar tendon shortening. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the knee-specific KOOS questionnaire (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score). Repeated measures ANOVA was used to analyze for differences in change from baseline KOOS subscales between patients with and patients without patellar tendon shortening.

RESULTS

A complete series of standardized pre-operative, eight weeks and one year post-operative radiographs was available for 87 knees in 82 patients. At eight weeks, 16 of 87 knees (18%) showed patellar tendon length shortening, and 27 of 87 knees (31%) at one year. We found no statistically significant relation between patellar tendon length shortening and change from baseline KOOS subscales at one year follow-up (pain p = 0.29, symptoms p = 0.56, ADL p = 0.23, sport or recreation p = 0.22, knee-related quality of life (QOL) p = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Patellar tendon length shortening following PFJR occurs in 31% of knees at one year, and does not result in inferior PROs.

Advances in Patellofemoral Arthroplasty

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.

High mid-term revision rate after treatment of large, full-thickness cartilage lesions and OA in the patellofemoral joint using a large inlay resurfacing prosthesis: HemiCAP-Wave®

PURPOSE

The HemiCAP-Wave® implant for the patellofemoral resurfacing treatment of large cartilage lesions and osteoarthritis (OA) was introduced in 2009. The outcome of a prospective cohort study of 18 patients with large trochlea lesions or isolated OA treated with the HemiCAP-Wave® implant is presented with up to a 6-year survival rate, and hypothesised short-to mid-term reduced pain and improved function.

METHODS

Indication for treatment with the HemiCAP-Wave® implant was a symptomatic, large cartilage lesion in trochlea demonstrated by MRI or arthroscopy, which was ICRS grades 3-4 and larger than 4 cm². Patients were followed for 2 years with American Knee Society Subjective outcome Scores (AKSS), pain scores and radiographic evaluations and for up to 6 years with complications and reoperations.

RESULTS

At the 1- and 2-year follow-up mean AKSS clinical score, the mean AKSS function score and mean pain score improved significantly. Within 6 years, 28 % of the implants were revised to arthroplasty due to the progression of cartilage lesions, osteoarthritis or increased knee pain.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrated an improved short- to mid-term clinical outcome and reduced pain but high mid-term revision rate after patellofemoral inlay resurfacing using the HemiCAP-Wave® implant. Patellofemoral resurfacing implantation treatment with a large inlay prosthesis can offer temporary treatment for large isolated patellofemoral cartilage lesions or OA in younger patients with almost healthy cartilage in the other compartments who are not yet eligible for arthroplasty treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.