Cargando…
Does patella resurfacing really matter? Pain and function in 972 patients after primary total knee arthroplasty: An observational study from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Resurfacing of the patella during primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is often recommended based on higher revision rates in non-resurfaced knees. As many of these revisions are insertions of a patella component due to pain, and since only patients with a non-resurfaced pat...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Informa Healthcare
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2856212/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20158405 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453671003587069 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Resurfacing of the patella during primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is often recommended based on higher revision rates in non-resurfaced knees. As many of these revisions are insertions of a patella component due to pain, and since only patients with a non-resurfaced patella have the option of secondary resurfacing, we do not really know whether these patients have more pain and poorer function. The main purpose of the present paper was therefore to assess pain and function at least 2 years after surgery for unrevised primary non-resurfaced and resurfaced TKA, and secondary among prosthesis brands. METHODS: Information needed to calculate subscales from the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) was collected in a questionnaire given to 972 osteoarthritis patients with intact primary TKAs that had been reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Pain and satisfaction on visual analog scales and improvement in EQ-5D index score ΔEQ-5D) were also used as outcomes. Outcomes were measured on a scale from 0 to 100 units (worst to best). To estimate differences in mean scores, we used multiple linear regression with adjustment for possible confounders. RESULTS: We did not observe any differences between resurfacing and non-resurfacing in any outcome, with estimated differences of ≤ 1.4 units and p-values of > 0.4. There was, however, a tendency of better results for the NexGen implant as compared to the reference brand AGC for symptoms (difference = 4.9, p = 0.05), pain (VAS) (difference = 8.3, p = 0.004), and satisfaction (VAS) (difference = 7.9, p = 0.02). However, none of these differences reached the stated level of minimal perceptible clinical difference. INTERPRETATION: Resurfacing of the patella has no clinical effect on pain and function after TKA. Differences between the brands investigated were small and they were assumed to be of minor importance. |
---|