Patellar resurfacing as a second stage procedure for persistent anterior knee pain after primary total knee arthroplasty

Daniilidis, Kiriakos; Vogt, B; Gosheger, Georg; Henrichs, Marcel-Philipp; Dieckmann, Ralf; Schulz, Dino; Hoell, Steffen

doi:10.1007/s00264-011-1463-8

Cited by 30 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, our results confirm that secondary patellar resurfacing for anterior knee pain in the setting of a previously not resurfaced patella does not necessarily result in the resolution of the pain [30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38]. As noted by Burnett [39] there are many causes of anterior knee pain other than the patellofemoral joint.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Selective Patellar Resurfacing in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study

Roberts¹,

Hayes²,

Tate

et al. 2015

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Selective Patellar Resurfacing in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study

Roberts¹,

Hayes²,

Tate

et al. 2015

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A recent study revealed improvements in knee scores in a similar percentage of cases, with a specific cause for anterior knee pain being unknown [16]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Secondary Patellar Resurfacing after Primary Bicondylar Knee Arthroplasty did Not Meet Patients’ Expectations

Correia¹,

Sieder²,

Kendoff³

et al. 2012

TOORTHJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Secondary patella resurfacing is a controversial procedure which is applied in patients with anterior knee pain after a bicondylar knee arthroplasty (with unresurfaced patella). A group of 46 patients were submitted to this procedure and their satisfaction, range of motion and pain improvement was evaluated. 52.2% of the patients were satisfied with the procedure, with an improvement in pain (Visual Analogue Scale) of 65% and an improvement in range of motion in 56,5%, with roundabout half of the patients having no resolution to their complaints. Whilst an improvement was not achieved in all patients, as it was initially hypothesised, this procedure should be considered when a revision knee arthroplasty is performed with an unresurfaced patella.

show abstract

“…Search strategy and results are summarized in the Figure. A total of 52 titles were reviewed, of which 16 studies underwent a full-text review, of which 15 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the current review. [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] Summary data and quality of the included studies according to GRADE are reported in Table 1. Of the 15 included studies, 2 randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) were identified, 18,21 although the outcomes of secondary patellar resurfacing were not the focus of these RCTs.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nine of the 15 included studies specifically stated the number of patients satisfied with the procedure. [9][10][11][12]16,17,19,22,23 Patient satisfaction in these 9 studies varied 12/20 relief of pain.…”

Section: Patient Satisfactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient Satisfaction and Functional Outcomes Following Secondary Patellar Resurfacing

Jonbergen¹,

Boeddha²,

Raaij³

2016

Orthopedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When secondary patellar resurfacing is performed, a uniformly and widely used scoring system that is validated for anterior knee pain caused by a retropatellar degeneration will give more insight into the results of this procedure. The cause of anterior knee pain following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is not always related to the patella itself. Other causes have been identified, such as an insufficient posterior cruciate ligament in the case of a posterior cruciate-retaining TKA or an internally rotated femoral and/or tibial component. Treatment of anterior knee pain following primary TKA with secondary patellar resurfacing is a controversial procedure with uncertain outcomes. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the available peer-reviewed literature on patient satisfaction and functional outcomes of secondary resurfacing. The authors performed a systematic computerized database search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, and EMBASE in October 2014. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A total of 15 articles met the inclusion criteria. In total, 148 (64%) of 232 patients were satisfied with the outcomes of secondary patellar resurfacing. A statistically significant improvement in knee scores was noted in all 9 studies that reported functional outcomes, although no clinically significant improvement in knee scores was observed. Reported complications include infections and impaired wound healing, patellar instability, and patellar fracture. Because the available evidence is of generally low quality, the results of this systematic review only support a weak recommendation for secondary patellar resurfacing if patient satisfaction and clinically important improvement of functional outcomes are the desired endpoints. [Orthopedics.2016; 39(5):e850-e856.].

show abstract

Patellar resurfacing as a second stage procedure for persistent anterior knee pain after primary total knee arthroplasty

Cited by 30 publications

References 26 publications

Selective Patellar Resurfacing in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study

Selective Patellar Resurfacing in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study

Secondary Patellar Resurfacing after Primary Bicondylar Knee Arthroplasty did Not Meet Patients’ Expectations

Patient Satisfaction and Functional Outcomes Following Secondary Patellar Resurfacing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About