Patellar management in revision total knee arthroplasty: is patellar resurfacing a better option?

Patellar Resurfacing in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Contentious Matter

Orthopaedic surgeons hold differing opinions on replacing the patella during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for knee osteoarthritis, sparking a continued discussion on the optimal approach. Patellar resurfacing (PR) replaces the patella's surface with a prosthetic component, aiming to enhance joint function and reduce anterior knee pain. However, it has potential complications such as avascular necrosis, fractures, and patellar clunk syndrome. This analysis evaluates the effectiveness of TKA with and without PR, highlighting the variations in outcomes between the two methods. Findings suggest that resurfacing is associated with improved clinical outcomes, activity level, patient satisfaction, and pain relief. Nevertheless, the decision should be individualized based on patient preferences and circumstances. Additional long-term randomised controlled trials incorporating outcome measures specific to patellar function are required to better understand the effects of PR versus non-resurfacing in TKA.

Management of Bone Loss in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: An International Consensus Symposium

The evaluation, classification, and treatment of significant bone loss after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) continue to be a complex and debated topic in revision TKA (rTKA). Despite the introduction of new evidence and innovative technologies aimed at addressing the approach and care of severe bone loss in rTKA, there is no single document that systematically incorporates these newer surgical approaches. Therefore, a comprehensive review of the treatment of severe bone loss in rTKA is necessary. The Stavros Niarchos Foundation Complex Joint Reconstruction Center Hospital for Special Surgery, dedicated to clinical care and research primarily in revision hip and knee replacement, convened a Management of Bone Loss in Revision TKA symposium on June 24, 2022. At this meeting, the 42 international invited experts were divided into groups; each group was assigned to discuss questions related to 1 of the 4 topics: (1) assessing preoperative workup and imaging, anticipated bone loss, classification system, and implant surveillance; (2) achieving durable fixation in the setting of significant bone loss in revision TKA; (3) managing patellar bone loss and the extensor mechanism in cases of severe bone loss; and (4) considering the use of complex modular replacement systems: hinges, distal femoral, and proximal tibial replacements. Each group came to consensus, when possible, based on an extensive literature review and interactive discussion on their group topic. This document reviews each these 4 areas, the consensus of each group, and directions for future research.

The Patellar Resurfacing in Total Knee Prosthesis: Indications for Bone Stock and Patellar Morphology

The patellar resurfacing is still a controversial and unresolved problem. The choice to use the patellar resurfacing in the total knee prosthesis (TKP) is decided by the surgeon's experience; he analyzes the thickness, the shape, consumption of the surface and he chooses the use of patellar resurfacing or to limit itself to cheiloplasty, denervation, or often to the release of the lateral wing ligament. He also assesses the metabolic state of the bone linked to Osteoporosis and the potential fragility of the joint and kneecap in particular. Bone loss after total knee arthroplasty (TKP) may lead to periprosthetic fractures that are associated with significant costs (morbidity, economic, etc.) and pose a challenge to operative fixation. The literature doesn't express a definitive judgment on the two options, since the results can be overlapped on average. Each option has advantages and disadvantages to be considered in the overall balance of the patellar operation. In reality, however, this technical choice requires more consolidated decision-making criteria so as to minimize the incidence of post-surgical femoral-patellar pain syndrome, the second cause of failure, which frequently leads to revision of the implant. The balance between experience and evidence can be a compromise in the choice of surgery. The experience documented in the literature must identify the parameters capable of constructing an algorithm aimed not only at the secondary resurfacing rate, but at the overall clinical evaluation. This has implications also for the rehabilitation of these patients after surgery.

Biomechanical Study of Patellar Component Fixation with Varying Degrees of Bone Loss

BACKGROUND

The decision as to whether or not to resurface the patella in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is affected by the amount of patellar bone stock remaining; however, the impact of the cancellous bone status on patellar component fixation has not been studied. Therefore, we conducted a biomechanical study of patellar component fixation with varying degrees of cancellous bone loss.

METHODS

Sixty pairs of cadaveric patellae were randomly assigned between 3 groups and prepared in similar manner to a TKA with the standard 3-hole configuration. A control patella and an experimental patella were designated in each pair. To simulate bone loss in the experimental patellae, 1, 2, and 3 of the standard drill holes were uniformly enlarged to 12 mm in group 1, group 2, and group 3, respectively. Afterward, an all-polyethylene patellar component was cemented to each patella, as done intraoperatively. Patellar components were then sheared off using a materials testing system. The resulting mean offset yield force was analyzed within each group using paired t-tests.

RESULTS

The mean offset yield force for the control patellae was greater than the experimental patellae in group 1. In groups 2 and 3, the experimental patellae produced a greater mean offset yield force than the control patellae. Comparison within each group did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference.

CONCLUSION

Bone loss with enlargement of the patellar fixation holes, as is frequently seen in revision TKA, with holes up to 12 mm, does not significantly decrease patellar component fixation shear strength in this biomechanical cadaveric study.

Long-Term Results of Patellar Bone-Grafting for Severe Patellar Bone Loss During Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on managing severe patellar bone loss after total knee arthroplasty. We previously described an initial series involving a novel technique of patellar bone-grafting with a short follow-up. The purpose of this study was to determine long-term survivorship and the radiographic and clinical results of patellar bone-grafting during revision total knee arthroplasty in a larger series with an extended follow-up.

METHODS

We identified 90 patients from a single institution who underwent 93 patellar bone-grafting procedures for severe patellar bone loss from 1997 to 2014. The mean age of the patients was 70 years, and 46% of patients were female. Forty-five knees (48%) underwent first-time revisions, and 19 knees (20%) had undergone a failed attempt at patellar resurfacings. Intraoperative patellar caliper thickness increased from a mean of 7 to 25 mm after patellar bone-grafting (p < 0.01). Radiographic review determined changes in patellar height, tracking, and remodeling. Knee Society scores (KSSs) were calculated. The mean follow-up was 8 years (range, 2 to 18 years). Kaplan-Meier methods determined survivorship free of any revision and any reoperation. Cox proportional hazards analysis determined predictive factors for failure.

RESULTS

Survivorship free of patellar revision was 96% at 10 years. Survivorship free of any revision was 84% at 10 years. Survivorship free of any reoperation was 78% at 10 years. Increasing patient age was the only protective factor against further patellar revision (hazard ratio, 0.95; p < 0.01). When comparing initial radiographs with final radiographs, patellar height decreased from 22 to 19 mm (p < 0.01), 80% compared with 59% of patellae articulated centrally in the trochlea (p = 0.01), and 32% compared with 77% had remodeling over the lateral femoral condyle (p < 0.01). Anterior knee pain decreased from 51% to 27% postoperatively (p = 0.01). The mean knee flexion improved from 101° to 108° (p = 0.03). The mean KSS improved from 50 to 85 points (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Reliable long-term clinical results can be expected with patellar bone-grafting for severe patellar bone loss during revision total knee arthroplasty. Pain, range of motion, and other reported outcomes improve despite radiographic changes to patellar height, tracking, and remodeling. This technique is a durable and reliable option when standard patellar resurfacing is not possible.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Ignore the Patella in Revision Total Knee Surgery: A Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up With Patella Component Retention

BACKGROUND

In the setting of aseptic revision, a common question is: what should be done with the previously resurfaced patella? We report on a series of aseptic revision total knee arthroplasties (RTKA) where one or both components were revised and the patella was not.

METHODS

The study group was 147 consecutive RTKA in 137 patients with a mean age of 70.1 ± 9.3 years where the patella was not revised. The average body mass index was 31.0 ± 5.4 kg/m². Follow-up was a minimum of 5 years (range, 5 to 12 years). At final follow-up, 13 patients died and 2 patients were lost to follow-up leaving 122 patients and 130 knees available for review. Mean time from primary surgery to RTKA was 9.2 ± 5.5 years. Both components were revised in 50 knees, the femur only in 11 knees, the tibia only in 12 knees, and 57 had an isolated polyethylene revision. We found 5 patients with a mismatch between the patella and femoral components and 30 cases with patella component wear identified intraoperatively.

RESULTS

At final follow-up, there were no reoperations on any patella and none were at risk of failure. There were 6 knees with a lateral patella tilt beyond 10°, but none were subluxed. Knee Society Scores averaged 85 ± 17.2 points at final follow-up.

CONCLUSION

At midterm follow-up in this group of RTKA where the patella was not revised, we identified no subsequent failures of the patella. This is despite the presence of mild patella polyethylene wear and mismatched shapes in several knees.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

The Challenge of Managing the "Third-Space" in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Review of Current Concepts

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the best treatment for advanced knee osteoarthritis and it has proven to be durable and effective. Anterior knee pain (AKP) is still one of the most frequent complications after TKA, but sometimes no recognized macroscopic causes can be found. The correct treatment of patella is considered the key for a proper management of AKP. The inclusion of patellar resurfacing during TKA has been described as a potential method for the reduction of AKP. After surgeons started to resurface the patella, new complications emerged, such as component failure, instability, fracture, tendon rupture, and soft tissue impingement. Patelloplasty has been proposed as a good alternative to resurfacing but whether or not to resurface the patella is still a controversial topic in the literature. Therefore, patellofemoral joint is a complex critical aspect in TKA and choosing between the several options of treatment of patella could not be sufficient. In this review, evidence-based studies do not succeed in resolving this difficult argument. The accurate management of the so-called “third space” should include an accurate assessment of cartilage layers, balance of soft tissue, preoperative anterior tracking, and positioning of the femoral and tibial components. In fact, the selection of suitable implants and adherence to proper surgical technique are the fundamental principles for the success of TKA.

Reconstruction of Disrupted Extensor Mechanism After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Disruption of the extensor mechanism after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a debilitating complication that results in extension lag, limited range of motion, difficulty in walking, frequent falls, and chronic pain. This study presents the clinical and radiographic results of reconstruction after extensor mechanism disruption in TKA patients.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with allograft reconstruction of extensor mechanism after TKA were identified retrospectively from an academic tertiary center for revision TKA.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients with a mean age of 61 ± 14 years at extensor mechanism reconstruction with a minimum of 2-year follow-up were included. The mean follow-up was 3.3 ± 2.2 years. Knee Society score (KSS), before and at final follow-up extension lag, range of motion, and radiographic change in patellar height were reviewed. There were statistically significant improvements between preoperative and final follow-up KSS (P < .001; KSS for pain, preoperative 40 ± 14 points to final follow-up 67 ± 15 points [P < .001]; KSS for function, preoperative 26 ± 21 points to final follow-up 48 ± 25 points [P < .001]). The extension lag was also reduced from 35° ± 16° preoperatively to 14° ± 18° (P < .001) at final follow-up. There was an average proximal patellar migration of 8 ± 10 mm. Five (31%) cases had an extensor lag of >30° or revision surgery for repeat extensor mechanism reconstruction, infection, or arthrodesis.

CONCLUSION

Our 10-year experience using allografts during extensor mechanism reconstruction demonstrates reasonable outcomes, but failures are to be anticipated in approximately one-third of patients.

A classification-based approach to the patella in revision total knee arthroplasty

Background

There is a paucity of data to guide management of the patella in revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKA). The purpose of this study was to review our experience with patellar management in RTKA.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 422 consecutive RTKAs at a minimum of 2 years (mean, 42 months). Patellar management was guided by a classification that considered stability, size, and position of the implanted patellar component, thickness/quality of remaining bone stock, and extensor mechanism competence.

Results

Management in 304 aseptic revisions included retention of a well-fixed component in 212 (69.7%) and revision using an all-polyethylene component in 46 (15.1%). Patella-related complications included 5 extensor mechanism ruptures (1.6%), 3 cases of patellar maltracking (1.0%), and 2 periprosthetic patellar fractures (0.7%). Of 118 2-stage revisions for infection, an all-polyethylene component was used in 88 (74.6%), patelloplasty in 20 (16.9%), and patellectomy in 7 (5.9%). Patella-related complications included 4 cases of patellar maltracking (3.4%), 3 extensor mechanism ruptures (2.5%), and 1 periprosthetic patellar fracture (0.8%).

Conclusions

Septic revisions required concomitant lateral releases more frequently (38.1% vs 10.9%; P < .02) but had a similar rate of patellar complications (6.8% vs 3.3%; P = .40). No cases required rerevision specifically for failure of the patellar component. Patients who had a patelloplasty had worse postoperative Knee Society functional scores than those with a retained or revised patellar component. In most aseptic RTKAs, a well-fixed patellar component can be retained. If revision is required, a standard polyethylene component is sufficient in most septic and aseptic revisions. Rerevisions related to the patellar component are infrequent.

Diagnostic Algorithm for Residual Pain After Total Knee Arthroplasty

Although total knee arthroplasty is a successful and cost-effective procedure, patient dissatisfaction remains as high as 50%. Postoperative residual knee pain after total knee arthroplasty, with or without crepitation, is a major factor that contributes to patient dissatisfaction. The most common location for residual pain after total knee arthroplasty is anteriorly. Because residual pain has been associated with an un-resurfaced patella, this review includes only registry data and total knee arthroplasty with patella replacement. Some suggest that the pathogenesis of residual knee pain may be related to mechanical stimuli that activate free nerve endings around the patellofemoral joint. Various etiologies have been implicated in residual pain, including (1) low-grade infection, (2) midflexion instability, and (3) component malalignment with patellar maltracking. Less common causes include (4) crepitation and patellar clunk syndrome; (5) patellofemoral symptoms, including overstuffing and avascular necrosis of the patella; (6) early aseptic loosening; (7) hypersensitivity to metal or cement; (8) complex regional pain syndrome; and (9) pseudoaneurysm. Because all of these conditions can lead to residual pain, identifying the etiology can be a difficult diagnostic challenge. Often, patients with persistent pain and normal findings on radiographs and laboratory workup may benefit from a diagnostic injection or further imaging. However, up to 10% to 15% of patients with residual pain may have unexplained pain. This literature review summarizes the findings on the causes of residual pain and presents a diagnostic algorithm to facilitate an accurate diagnosis for residual pain after total knee arthroplasty.

What Is the Role for Patelloplasty With Gullwing Osteotomy in Revision TKA?

BACKGROUND

Management of the patella in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is challenging as a result of the deficient or unusable bone stock for patellar resurfacing that is frequently encountered. Options proposed in this setting include various patelloplasty procedures, patellectomy, and special patellar components. We sought to better define the role and results of one patelloplasty procedure, the gullwing osteotomy, used in revision TKA.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) How much improvement in the outcome measures of range of motion and Knee Society scores was seen after revision TKA with a gullwing osteotomy? (2) What are the radiographic results of this osteotomy as judged by patellar healing and patellar tracking? (3) What complications are associated with the gullwing osteotomy in revision TKA?

METHODS

Between December 2003 and July 2012, we used a gullwing osteotomy on patients undergoing revision TKA (n = 238) in which the patellar remnant was avascular or less than 12 mm thick. This uncommon procedure was used in 17 of 115 (15%) of the patellae revised during this time. We performed manual chart reviews on all patients to collect preoperative and postoperative range of motion and Knee Society scores as well as radiographic review at last followup to assess patellar healing and tracking.

RESULTS

In patients with at least 2 years of followup, the preoperative range of motion was a median -7.5° of extension (interquartile range [IQR], -15°-0°) and 90° of flexion (IQR, 90°-100°). Postoperative extension improved to 0° (IQR, 0°-0°; p = 0.015). With the numbers available, median flexion arc did not change at last followup (110°; IQR, 95°-120°; p = 0.674). The Knee Society score improved from a combined (clinical + functional) mean of 86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 56-116) preoperatively to 142 (95% CI, 121-163; p < 0.001) postoperatively. Radiographically, 12 of 13 patients demonstrated healing of the osteotomy with osseous union and one patient healed with a fibrous union. Nine of the 10 patients with at least 2 years of followup had a centrally tracking gullwing osteotomized patella at last followup. One patient, with just over 3 years of followup, exhibited lateral subluxation without evidence of fracture. Three of the 10 patients with greater than 2 years of followup developed recurrent infections. One patient had avascular necrosis with fragmentation of the patella at 4 months postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patellar bone stock is often compromised in revision TKA, leaving the surgeon with very few options for reconstruction. Using this technique, we found acceptable function, no aseptic rerevisions for patellofemoral complications, nine of 10 of patellae tracking within the trochlear groove, and radiographic healing of the majority of the osteotomies. The gullwing osteotomy may be considered an option in these difficult revisions, but further studies with more complete followup are needed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Failure of aseptic revision total knee arthroplasties

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In Norway, the proportion of revision knee arthroplasties increased from 6.9% in 1994 to 8.5% in 2011. However, there is limited information on the epidemiology and causes of subsequent failure of revision knee arthroplasty. We therefore studied survival rate and determined the modes of failure of aseptic revision total knee arthroplasties.

METHOD

This study was based on 1,016 aseptic revision total knee arthroplasties reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register between 1994 and 2011. Revisions done for infections were not included. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used to assess the survival rate and the relative risk of re-revision with all causes of re-revision as endpoint.

RESULTS

145 knees failed after revision total knee arthroplasty. Deep infection was the most frequent cause of re-revision (28%), followed by instability (26%), loose tibial component (17%), and pain (10%). The cumulative survival rate for revision total knee arthroplasties was 85% at 5 years, 78% at 10 years, and 71% at 15 years. Revision total knee arthroplasties with exchange of the femoral or tibial component exclusively had a higher risk of re-revision (RR = 1.7) than those with exchange of the whole prosthesis. The risk of re-revision was higher for men (RR = 2.0) and for patients aged less than 60 years (RR = 1.6).

INTERPRETATION

In terms of implant survival, revision of the whole implant was better than revision of 1 component only. Young age and male sex were risk factors for re-revision. Deep infection was the most frequent cause of failure of revision of aseptic total knee arthroplasties.

The impact of patellar resurfacing in two-stage revision of the infected total knee arthroplasty

Evidence for optimal management of the patellofemoral joint in revision surgery for the infected TKA is limited. We reviewed 69 infected TKAs undergoing two-stage revision. Fifty four patellae were resurfaced, 11 had patelloplasty performed, two were augmented with trabecular metal, one had impaction grafting, and one knee underwent patellectomy. Average follow-up was 4.5 years. The patients that received patellar resurfacing at re-implantation experienced statistically significant improvements in KSS pain score, functional KSS, and patellar score (P < 0.03). One further patient treated with impaction grafting improved significantly in terms of pain and function. Patients treated with patelloplasty, trabecular metal augmentation, or patellectomy did not have significant improvements in clinical or functional outcome. Patient age, use of dynamic vs. static spacer, use of extensor mechanism release, and differences in Charlson index did not seem to statistically affect outcome. We recommend that every effort should be made to minimize patellar bone loss in first stage resection, as inability to resurface the patella at time of reimplantation may adversely affect patient outcome.

Patellar resurfacing versus no resurfacing in two-stage revision of infected total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Cartilage debridement and staged reimplantation are the most common treatments for infected total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Very few studies have focused on the management of primarily non-resurfaced patellae in infected TKA. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of patellar resurfacing and non-resurfacing in two-stage revision of infected TKA.

METHODS

This study involved a retrospective comparison of the reinfection rate and clinical outcomes of revision TKA patients managed with patellar resurfacing (22 patients, 23 knees) and patients managed without patellar resurfacing (26 patients) at a minimum two-year follow-up. The mean age in the resurfacing group was 69.4years old, and the mean age in the non-resurfacing group was 67.3years old. Three scales were used in the assessment: the Knee Society Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and the Anterior Knee Pain Scale.

RESULTS

Three knees had recurrent infections. All infections occurred in patients who had received patellar resurfacing. There were no significant differences between groups in clinical results and on the Anterior Knee Pain Scale. A lack of patellar resurfacing did not increase recurrence of infection and did not result in significant clinical differences compared to patellar resurfacing.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that preservation of the original patellar bone is a feasible option for patellar management in revision of septic TKA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Patellar resurfacing versus nonresurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

PURPOSE

Patella resurfacing or nonresurfacing in total knee arthroplasty remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of patellar resurfacing through an evaluation of the current literature.

METHODS

We carried out a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing total knee arthroplasties performed with and without patellar resurfacing. Outcomes of reoperation, anterior knee pain and knee scores were analysed.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials assessing 1,725 knees were eligible. The absolute risk of reoperation was reduced by 4 % (95 % confidence interval, 2-6 %) in the patellar resurfacing arm (between-study heterogeneity, P = 0.05, I(2) = 42 %), implying that one would have to resurface 25 patellae (95 % confidence interval, 17-50 patellae) in order to prevent one reoperation. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of anterior knee pain, knee pain score, Knee Society score and knee function score. But in the studies followed up for a mean time of not less than five years, a difference was found between the two arms in Knee Society scores (RR = 2.14, 95 % confidence interval, 0.76-3.52; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence indicates that patellar resurfacing reduces the risk of reoperation after total knee arthroplasty. Patellar resurfacing patients may make a difference in long-term follow-up (five or more 5 years) of Knee Society scores. In other aspects, the benefit of patellar resurfacing is limited. Additionally, more carefully and scientifically designed randomised controlled trials are required to further prove the claim.

Minimum 6-year follow-up of revision total knee arthroplasty without patella reimplantation

Management options for the polyethylene patellar button during a revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) include retention, revision, or removal of the button without replacement (patelloplasty). Our purpose was to determine the midterm outcome of patients undergoing revision TKA with patelloplasty. We retrospectively reviewed a single surgeon's database for patients undergoing such surgery from May 2001 to June 2005 and identified 33 (34 knees). The 25 patients (26 knees) who had at least 6 years' follow-up formed our study group. We compared preoperative and final follow-up Knee Society Scores and radiographs. Mean Knee Society Scores had increased from 50 (range, 23-88) to 93 (range, 41-100), respectively. No patient required additional surgery. We conclude that, at midterm follow-up, patelloplasty appears to be a satisfactory option in the management of the patella in revision TKA.

Patelloplasty versus traditional total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical effects of patelloplasty and traditional patellar management in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for osteoarthritis. A total of 152 patients with osteoarthritis treated with TKA between January 2004 and December 2005 were retrospectively studied. The patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: the patelloplasty group (group A; n=76) and the traditional treatment group (group B; n=76). Knee Society Score (KSS), Feller patellar score, Lonner patellar score, patient satisfaction, joint range of motion (ROM), and incidence of postoperative anterior knee pain were compared between the groups. Mean follow-up was 55 months (range, 48-71 months) for 132 patients, including 68 patients in group A and 64 in group B. Significant differences were found in KSS functional score, Feller patellar score, Lonner patellar score, and patient satisfaction, but no significant differences were found in ROM and total KSS score between the groups postoperatively. Group A obtained higher KSS scores and patient satisfaction than group B, with no significant difference in postoperative anterior knee pain. Postoperative radiographs revealed a significant difference in patellofemoral congruence between the groups. Patelloplasty relieves pain, enhances patient satisfaction, and improves function better than traditional patellar management in TKA with patellar nonresurfacing.