Knee manipulation under anaesthetic following total knee arthroplasty

Risk factors for failure of manipulation under anesthesia after total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) is a well-established treatment for stiffness after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Risk factors for failure of MUA remain largely unknown. The primary aim of this study was to identify risk factors for failure of MUA after TKA.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study including 470 patients who underwent MUA after primary TKA with minimum 2 year follow-up. Patients were grouped into success (n = 412) or failure (n = 58) cohorts; failure was defined as flexion < 90° at most recent follow-up or revision for stiffness. The increase in flexion post-MUA for the cohort was calculated. Several clinical, patient, and surgical factors were analyzed using univariate, followed by multivariable logistic regression models to identify independent risk factors associated with failure.

RESULTS

The mean increase in flexion was 42° (range 0-115). BMI 30-35 (p = 0.01, odds ratio (OR) 2.42; 95% CI 1.25-4.68) and poorer pre-MUA flexion (p < 0.01, OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.23-1.67) were risk factors for failure. When considering revision for stiffness only, BMI 30-35 (p = 0.01, OR 3.27; 95% CI 1.41-7.61), lower pre-MUA flexion (p < 0.01, OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.18-1.75), and history of prior knee surgery (p = 0.04, OR 2.31; 95% CI 1.06-5.04) were predictors of failure. Time to MUA (p = 0.48), thromboprophylaxis (p = 0.44), pre-operative opioid use (p = 0.34), depression/anxiety (p = 1.0), and several other factors analyzed were not associated with failure.

CONCLUSION

In this large cohort, elevated BMI and lower pre-MUA flexion were risk factors for failure of MUA. History of prior knee surgery was an additional predictor of requiring revision for stiffness.

Gravity-Assisted Manipulation (GAM) Technique for the Treatment of Knee Arthrofibrosis

Arthrofibrosis is a known complication after knee surgery, resulting in stiffness and decreased range of motion for patients. Manipulation under anesthesia is a commonly used technique to address postoperative arthrofibrosis after knee surgery. Often, direct pressure is applied to the knee during the manipulation. This can be difficult and can place undue stress above and below the joint. This Technical Note presents the technique for manipulation under anesthesia using gravity and the native knee motion alone to improve knee range of motion.

Manipulation Under Anesthesia is Safe After Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is thought to facilitate durable, biological fixation between the bone and implant. However, the 4-12 weeks required for osseointegration coincides with the optimal timeframe to perform a manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) if a patient develops postoperative stiffness. This study aims to determine the impact of early MUA on cementless fixation by comparing functional outcomes and survivorship of cementless and cemented TKAs.

METHODS

A consecutive series of patients who underwent MUA for postoperative stiffness within 90 days of primary, unilateral TKA at 2 academic institutions between 2014 and 2018 were identified. Cases involving extensive hardware removal were excluded. Cementless TKAs undergoing MUA (n = 100) were propensity matched 1:1 to cemented TKAs undergoing MUA (n = 100) using age, gender, body mass index, and year of surgery. Both groups had comparable baseline Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS), Short Form (SF)-12 Physical, and SF-12 Mental scores. MUA-related complications as well as postoperative KOOS and SF-12 scores were compared.

RESULTS

MUA-related complications were equivalently low in both groups (P = .324), with only 1 patella component dissociation in the cementless group. No tibial or femoral components acutely loosened in the perioperative period. Postoperative KOOS (P = .101) and SF-12 Mental scores (P = .380) were similar between groups. Six-year survivorship free from any revision after MUA was 98.0% in both groups (P = 1.000).

CONCLUSION

Early postoperative MUA after cementless TKA was not associated with increased MUA-related complications or worse patient-reported outcomes compared to cemented TKA. Short-term survivorship was also comparable, suggesting high durability of the bone-implant interface.

Manipulation Under Anesthesia Is Associated With an Increased Rate of Early Total Knee Arthroplasty Revision

Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) frequently has been used as a first-line treatment to restore functional range of motion after unsuccessful physical therapy. Although there are studies reporting that MUA assisted in restoring range of motion, there is a paucity of literature on the influence of MUA on the risk of revision TKA. The goal of our study was to determine whether MUA was associated with an increase in the rate of revision TKA within 2 years of MUA. A total of 49,310 patients within a single institution who underwent primary TKA were identified from 1999 to 2019. Data were matched at a 1:3 ratio (TKA with and without MUA, respectively) based on age, sex, and body mass index. A matched comparison cohort was conducted, with the MUA cohort having 575 patients and the no MUA cohort having 1725 patients. A statistically significant increase in the rate of noninfectious etiology revision TKA was found in the MUA cohort (7.3%) compared with the no MUA cohort (4.9%; P=.034). The most common reason for revision TKA after MUA was persistent stiffness, including arthrofibrosis and ankylosis; however, aseptic loosening, ligamentous instability, and periprosthetic fracture were found to be responsible for 21.4% of revision TKA procedures. Although MUA is a commonly performed procedure for treating stiffness after primary TKA, the orthopedic surgeon should counsel patients on the association of increased rate of revision TKA after MUA, most commonly, persistent stiffness. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(5):270-275.].

Mid-term outcomes of posterior capsular release for fixed flexed deformity after total knee arthroplasty

Fixed flexion deformity also called flexion contracture is relatively rare, but a very demanding functional limitation that both surgeons and patients may have to deal with. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the functional outcomes after posteromedial capsular release in case of fixed flexed deformity > 15 o . Between June 2011 and November 2018, 15 patients (6 males and 9 females) were treated with open posterior capsular release through medial approach for fixed flexion deformity of the knee > 15 o and prospectively followed with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Primary outcome was knee extension measured with a manual goniometer and secondary outcome treatment related complications. All patients reported inability to walk and clinical semiology of pain and swelling. The mean age of the study population at surgery was 61.7 years with a mean BMI of 30.9 kg/m2. Complete data were recorded for all patients. Statistically significant improvement was found in clinical and functional assessment tools analyzed from baseline to the latest follow-up (p<0.05). More precisely, the mean postoperative fixed flexion deformity was decreased from 23.57 o to 2.86 o . No adverse effect or major complications were recorded during follow-up. Posterior open release via posteromedial was shown to be an efficient and safe salvage procedure to deal with persistent fixed flexion deformity of more than 15 o following TKA at two years follow-up. However, future studies with a higher number of participants and longer follow-up should be conducted to validate our data.

Postoperative pain as a risk factor for stiff knee following total knee arthroplasty and excellent patientreported outcomes after manipulation under anesthesia

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) is the first-choice treatment for stiffness following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) unresponsive to pain management and physiotherapy. Some of the predisposing factors and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following MUA remain poorly studied. We retrospectively investigated the etiological risk factors and the outcomes of MUA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

391 TKA patients from a randomized trial comparing the use of a tourniquet and anesthesia (spinal or general) were analyzed, and patients needing MUA were identified (MUA group). We evaluated in-hospital opioid consumption, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), range of motion (ROM), and pain assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory-short form with a 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

39 (10%) MUA patients were identified. The MUA patients were younger (60 years vs. 64 years, difference -4, 95% CI -6 to -1) and had higher postoperative oxycodone consumption (66 mg vs. 51 mg, median difference 11, CI 1-22) than the no-MUA patients. The proportion of MUA patients who contacted the emergency department within 3 months because of pain was larger than that of non-MUA patients (41% vs. 12%, OR 5, CI 3-10). At the 1-year follow-up, the ROM was improved by 39° following MUA, but the total ROM was worse in the MUA group (115° vs. 124°, p < 0.001). No difference was found in the OKS between the MUA and no-MUA patients.

INTERPRETATION

Higher postoperative pain seems to predict MUA risk. MUA performed 3 months postoperatively offers substantial ROM improvement and comparable PROMs to no-MUA patients 1 year after TKA.

Multimodal conservative management of arthrofibrosis after total knee arthroplasty compared to manipulation under anesthesia: a feasibility study with retrospective cohort comparison

Background

The ideal treatment of early-stage arthrofibrosis after total knee arthroplasty is unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine the treatment effect, including variability, and feasibility of a multimodal physical therapy program as compared to manipulation under anesthesia.

Methods

This was a prospective feasibility study with a retrospective cohort comparison. Ten consecutive patients (aged 64 ± 9 years, 7 females) with early-stage arthrofibrosis were enrolled 6 weeks after primary total knee arthroplasty and participated in the multimodal physical therapy program. The multimodal physical therapy program consisted of manual therapy, therapeutic exercise, and static progressive splinting delivered over 4 weeks. The outcomes included knee range of motion (ROM), adherence, patient satisfaction, and safety. Data were compared to a retrospective cohort of 31 patients with arthrofibrosis (aged 65 ± 9 years, 20 females) who underwent manipulation under anesthesia followed by physical therapy.

Results

Overall, knee ROM outcomes were similar between multimodal physical therapy (110° ± 14) and manipulation under anesthesia (109° ± 11). Seven out of ten patients achieved functional ROM (≥ 110°) and avoided manipulation under anesthesia with the multimodal physical therapy program. Three out of 10 multimodal physical therapy patients required manipulation under anesthesia secondary to failure to demonstrate progress within 4 weeks of the multimodal physical therapy program. Adherence to the multimodal physical therapy program was 87 ± 9%. The median patient satisfaction with the multimodal physical therapy program was “very satisfied.” Safety concerns were minimal.

Conclusion

The use of the multimodal physical therapy program is feasible for treating early-stage arthrofibrosis after total knee arthroplasty, with 70% of patients avoiding manipulation under anesthesia. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the efficacy of the multimodal physical therapy program and to determine the optimal patient selection for the multimodal physical therapy program versus manipulation under anesthesia.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04837872.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40814-022-01026-y.

Treatment of arthrofibrosis and stiffness after total knee arthroplasty: an updated review of the literature

PURPOSE

There is currently no consensus regarding the optimal treatment for stiffness following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). With the increased utilization of value-based models, it is important to determine the most effective treatments that will reduce the need for further intervention and additional expenditure. A systematic review was performed to compare the outcomes of manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA), arthroscopic lysis of adhesions (aLOA), and revision TKA (rTKA) for arthrofibrosis and stiffness following TKA.

METHODS

PubMed and MEDLINE databases were reviewed for articles published through October 2020. Studies were included if they reported patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following MUA, aLOA, or rTKA. The primary endpoint was PROMs, while secondary outcomes included range of motion and the percentage of patients who pursued further treatment for stiffness.

RESULTS

A total of 40 studies were included: 21 on rTKA, 7 on aLOA, and 14 on MUA. The mean or median post-operative arc ROM was > 90° in 6/20 (30%) rTKA, 5/7 (71%) aLOA, and 7/10 (70%) MUA studies. Post-operative Knee Society (KSS) clinical and functional scores were the greatest in patients who underwent MUA and aLOA. As many as 43% of rTKA patients required further care compared to 25% of aLOA and 17% of MUA patients.

CONCLUSION

Stiffness following TKA remains a challenging condition to treat. Nonetheless, current evidence suggests that patients who undergo rTKA have poorer clinical outcomes and a greater need for further treatment compared to patients who undergo MUA or aLOA.

Clinical Course of Pain and Function Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is widely considered a successful intervention for osteoarthritis and other degenerative knee diseases. This study addresses the need for a high-quality meta-analysis that outlines the clinical course of pain and function post-TKA.

METHODS

The review included prospective cohort studies assessing pain or function of patients undergoing primary TKA at baseline (preoperatively) and at least 2 additional time points including one at least 12 months postoperatively. Two reviewers independently screened references, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. The time course of recovery of pain and function was modeled using fractional polynomial meta-regression.

RESULTS

In total, 191 studies with 59,667 patients were included, most with low risk of bias. The variance-weighted mean pain score (/100, 0 = no pain) was 64.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] 60.2-67.7) preoperatively, 24.1 (95% CI 20.3-27.9) at 3 months, 20.4 (95% CI 16.7-24.0) at 6 months, and 16.9 (95%CI 13.6-20.3) at 12 months, and remained low (10.1; 95% CI 4.8-15.4) at 10 years postoperatively. The variance-weighted mean function score (/100, 0 = worst function) was 47.1 (95% CI 45.7-48.4) preoperatively, 72.8 (95% CI 71.3-74.4) at 3 months, 76.3 (95% CI 74.7-77.8) at 6 months, and 78.1 (95%CI 76.4-79.7) at 12 months. Function scores were good (79.7; 95% CI 77.9-81.5) at 10 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing primary TKA can expect a large and rapid but incomplete recovery of pain and function in the first postoperative year. At 10 years, the gains in pain scores may still remain while there is an improvement in function.

Effect of Manipulation under Anesthesia of the First Knee in Staged Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty on Clinical Outcome and Satisfaction

This study aimed to evaluate whether manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) affect clinical outcome including range of motion (ROM) and patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). It is hypothesized that MUA improves clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction after primary TKA. This retrospective study analyzed 97 patients who underwent staged bilateral primary TKA. MUA of knee flexion more than 120 degrees was performed a week after index surgery just before operation of the opposite site. The first knees with MUA were classified as the MUA group and the second knees without MUA as the control group. ROM, Knee Society Knee Score, Knee Society Functional Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) score, and patient satisfaction were assessed. Postoperative flexion was significantly greater in the MUA group during 6 months follow-up (6 weeks: 111.6 vs. 99.8 degrees, p < 0.001; 3 months: 115.9 vs. 110.2 degrees, p = 0.001; 6 months: 120.2 vs. 117.0 degrees, p = 0.019). Clinical outcomes also showed similar results with knee flexion during 2 years follow-up. Patient satisfaction was significantly high in the MUA group during 12 months (3 months: 80.2 vs. 71.5, p < 0.001; 6 months: 85.8 vs. 79.8, p < 0.001; 12 months: 86.1 vs. 83.9, p < 0.001; 24 months: 86.6 vs. 85.5, p = 0.013). MUA yielded improvement of clinical outcomes including ROM, and patient satisfaction, especially in the early period after TKA. MUA in the first knee could be taken into account to obtain early recovery and to improve patient satisfaction in staged bilateral TKA.

Manipulation under anaesthesia after primary total knee arthroplasty : minimal differences in intravenous sedation alone versus neuraxial anaesthesia

AIMS

Manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) remains an effective intervention to address restricted range of motion (ROM) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and occurs in 2% to 3% of primary TKAs at our institution. Since there are few data on the outcomes of MUA with different anaesthetic methods, we sought to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing MUA with intravenous (IV) sedation and neuraxial anaesthesia.

METHODS

We identified 548 MUAs after primary TKA (136 IV sedation, 412 neuraxial anaesthesia plus IV sedation) from March 2016 to July 2019. The mean age of this cohort was 62 years (35 to 88) with a mean body mass index of 31 kg/m² (18 to 49). The mean time from primary TKA to MUA was 10.2 weeks (6.2 to 24.3). Pre-MUA ROM was similar between groups; overall mean pre-MUA extension was 4.2° (p = 0.452) and mean pre-MUA flexion was 77° (p = 0.372). We compared orthopaedic complications, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, length of stay (LOS), and immediate and three-month follow-up knee ROM between these groups.

RESULTS

Following MUA, patients with IV sedation had higher mean VAS pain scores of 5.2 (SD 1.8) compared to 4.1 (SD = 1.5) in the neuraxial group (p < 0.001). The mean LOS was shorter in patients that received IV sedation (9.5 hours (4 to 31)) compared to neuraxial anaesthesia (11.9 hours (4 to 51)) (p = 0.009), but an unexpected overnight stay was similar in each group (8.6%). Immediate-post MUA ROM was 1° to 121° in the IV sedation group and 0.9° to 123° in the neuraxial group (p = 0.313). Three-month follow-up ROM was 2° to 108° in the IV sedation group and 1.9° to 110° in the neuraxial anaesthesia group (p = 0.325) with a mean loss of 13° (ranging from 5° gain to 60° loss), in both groups by three months. No patients in either group sustained a complication.

CONCLUSION

IV sedation alone and neuraxial anaesthesia are both effective anaesthetic methods for MUA after primary TKA. Surgeons and anaesthetists should offer these anaesthetic techniques to match patient-specific needs as the orthopaedic outcomes are similar. Also, patients should be counselled that ROM following MUA may decrease over time. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):126-130.

Manipulation under Anesthesia after Knee Arthroplasty Is Associated with Worse Long-Term Clinical Outcomes and Survivorship

The literature is mixed on the long-term fate of knees that undergo manipulation under anesthesia (MUA). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the long-term outcomes and survivorship of patients who required a MUA after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) compared with a cohort of patients who did not undergo a MUA. Between 2003 and 2007, 2,193 patients (2,783 knees) underwent primary TKA with 2-year minimum follow-up; 182 knees (6.5%) had a MUA. Patients who had a manipulation were younger (p < 0.001) and had worse preoperative range of motion (ROM) (p < 0.001). Postoperative ROM, Knee Society clinical (KSC), functional, and pain (KSP) scores, revisions, and survivorship were compared between MUA and no MUA. Mean follow-up was 9.7 years. MUA patients had lower postoperative ROM (p < 0.001), change in ROM (p < 0.001), KSC (p < 0.001), KSP (p < 0.001), and change in KSP scores (0.013). Revisions occurred in 18 knees (9.9%) in the MUA group compared with 77 knees (3%) without a MUA (p < 0.001). Most common reason for revision after MUA was continued stiffness (50%). Relative risk for revision after one MUA was 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.8, p < 0.001) and after three or more MUAs were 27.02 (95% CI, 16.5-44.1, p < 0.001). Ten-year survival after MUA was 89.4% (95% CI, 87.1-91.7%) compared with 97.2% (95% CI, 96.9-97.5%) without a MUA (p < 0.001). Patients who undergo a MUA after primary TKA may have a knee at risk with higher revision rates, worse long-term clinical scores, ROM and survivorship.

Manipulation under Anesthesia for Stiffness of the Knee Joint after Total Knee Replacement

Background

Stiffness of the knee joint is a feared complication after total knee replacement (TKR). An initial noninvasive treatment option is the manipulation of the knee under anesthesia (MUA). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the midterm result of the MUA for joint stiffness after primary TKR.

Methods

Patients treated with the MUA for knee stiffness after primary TKR surgery performed at Akershus University Hospital during 2014-2018 were invited to a follow-up clinic. The range of motion (ROM) of the knee joint was measured using a goniometer, and the patients reported the Lysholm score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and Tegner score. In addition, any complications or reoperation after the MUA was noted.

Results

A total of 24 patients were identified in the journal system at the hospital. Twenty-three of these (17 women and 6 men) attended the designated follow-up on average 26 months (range [r], 16-35) after the MUA. The total ROM was 97° (r, 84°-116°) at the time of follow-up, compared with 70° (r, 50°-80°) before the MUA (P < .001, the Mann-Whitney U-test). A regression analysis indicated that the ROM at follow-up was predicted by the time from the index TKR surgery to the MUA, with the early MUA improving results (P = .02). The median Lysholm score was 57.1 (r, 17.9-92.9).

Conclusions

There is a clinically and statistically significant increase of the total ROM of the knee joint after the MUA for knee stiffness after TKR. The earlier MUA yields a better total ROM. Despite improvement in the ROM, the patients did not achieve normal function of the knee joint.

Acquired Idiopathic Stiffness After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Stiffness is a common reason for suboptimal clinical outcomes after primary total knee arthroplasty (pTKA). There is a lack of consensus regarding its definition, which is often conflated with its histopathologic subcategory-i.e., arthrofibrosis. There is value in refining the definition of acquired idiopathic stiffness in an effort to select for patients with arthrofibrosis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to establish a consensus definition of acquired idiopathic stiffness, determine its prevalence after pTKA, and identify potential risk factors for its development.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), and Scopus databases were searched from 2002 to 2017. Studies that included patients with stiffness after pTKA were screened with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria to isolate the subset of patients with acquired idiopathic stiffness unrelated to known extrinsic or surgical causes. Three authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and collected data. Outcomes of interest were then analyzed according to age, sex, and body mass index (BMI).

RESULTS

In the 35 included studies (48,873 pTKAs), the mean patient age was 66 years. In 63% of the studies, stiffness was defined as a range of motion of <90° or a flexion contracture of >5° at 6 to 12 weeks postoperatively. The prevalence of acquired idiopathic stiffness after pTKA was 4%, and this did not differ according to age (4%, I = 95%, among patients <65 years old and 5%, I = 96%, among those ≥65 years old; p = 0.238). The prevalence of acquired idiopathic stiffness was significantly lower in males (1%, I = 85%) than females (3%, I = 95%) (p < 0.0001) as well as in patients with a BMI of <30 kg/m (2%, I = 94%) compared with those with a BMI of ≥30 kg/m (5%, I = 97%) (p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary literature supports the following definition for acquired idiopathic stiffness: a range of motion of <90° persisting for >12 weeks after pTKA in patients in the absence of complicating factors including preexisting stiffness. The mean prevalence of acquired idiopathic stiffness after pTKA was 4%; females and obese patients were at increased risk.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Arthroscopic Lysis of Adhesions With Manipulation Under Anesthesia Versus Manipulation Alone in the Treatment of Arthrofibrosis After TKA: A Matched Cohort Study

Arthrofibrosis following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a debilitating complication. Treatment options include physical therapy, manipulation under anesthesia (MUA), and arthroscopic lysis of adhesions (ALOA) with or without MUA. The authors studied 70 patients with arthrofibrosis after TKA treated with MUA or ALOA plus MUA. In this matched cohort study, 35 patients were treated with MUA and 35 patients were treated with ALOA plus MUA. Total knee arthroplasty followed by MUA was performed by 2 surgeons and TKA followed by MUA plus ALOA was performed by 1 surgeon at 1 institution. Electronic records were used to collect information and match cohorts based on age, sex, body mass index, diabetes mellitus, perioperative range of motion (ROM), and timing of the procedure for arthrofibrosis. The combination of MUA and ALOA yielded changes in ROM: a 72.7% increase 4 to 12 weeks after index TKA (P=.032), a 50.0% increase 12+ weeks after TKA (P=.032), and a 99.8% increase in patients with a pre-manipulation ROM of 0° to 60° (P=.001). Manipulation under anesthesia yielded a 49.2% increase 4 to 12 weeks after TKA (P=.161), a 27.0% increase 12+ weeks after TKA (P=.161), and a 68.8% increase in patients with pre-manipulation ROM of 0° to 60° (P=.084). Patients treated with ALOA plus MUA had greater increases in ROM (P=.026) and final knee flexion (P=.028) compared with those treated with MUA alone. Arthrofibrosis following TKA is a complication that often requires additional procedures. Traditionally, ALOA is added 3+ months from index TKA, when abundant scar formation has occurred. This study found a benefit to ALOA plus MUA compared with MUA alone, with the largest benefit in patients whose pre-manipulation ROM was 0° to 60°. [Orthopedics. 2019; 42(3):163-167.].

Alternative technique for knee manipulation under anesthesia

Total knee arthroplasty is a successful surgery for the majority of patients with osteoarthrosis of the knee. Approximately 5% of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty experience loss of motion or arthrofibrosis. Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) is generally indicated for patients who do not achieve >90° of flexion by 6-12 weeks postoperatively. Complications from MUA are rare but can be devastating. We describe a novel technique for MUA with no reported major complications in our review of 78 patients. The average flexion improved from 80.0 (±3.8) before manipulation to 115.4 (±2.1) after manipulation. There were no major complications including fracture or extensor mechanism injury.

Manipulation under anesthesia following total knee arthroplasty: a comprehensive review of literature

INTRODUCTION

The etiology of the stiff knee after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is largely unknown, although excessive scar tissue due to arthrofibrosis is an important reason for a limited range of motion (ROM) after this procedure. Persistent limited ROM after TKA results in poor patient-reported outcomes and is increasingly becoming a more prominent reason for TKA revision surgery.

METHODS

A narrative review of current literature on manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) after TKA analyzing etiology and risk factors for stiffness after TKA, effectiveness of MUA and what is known about rehabilitation after MUA.

RESULTS

Literature describes numerous risk factors for insufficient knee ROM after TKA, but a comprehensive valid risk model is lacking. MUA is an effective treatment option with evidence suggesting better outcomes if performed within the first 3 months after TKA. The wide variety in both the indication and timing for MUA, and the lack of scientific evidence on how to rehabilitate patients after MUA, complicates the interpretation of available literature. This is even more so the case on the reporting of one versus two or more MUAs after TKA.

CONCLUSION

Future comparative trials, preferably with a randomized study design, should be conducted to elude more clear indications for MUA, to give clinical guidance on correct timing for MUA and on how to rehabilitate patients afterward.

Protocol-Driven Revision for Stiffness After Total Knee Arthroplasty Improves Motion and Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Stiffness after revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a difficult problem without a well-defined treatment algorithm. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of revision TKA for stiffness within the context of differential component replacement.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent revision TKA were retrospectively identified and included those who received debridement and polyethylene liner exchange alone, revision of only one of the femoral or tibial fixed components, or revision of all components. Preoperative and postoperative range of motion and Knee Society score (KSS) were collected.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine knees were included in the study group with a mean follow-up of 43 months (range, 12-205 months). The mean prerevision flexion contracture of 17° improved to 5° after surgical intervention (P < .001). Similarly, mean flexion and motion arc improved from 70° to 92° and from 53° to 87°, respectively (P < .001). Mean KSS knee scores improved from 42 to 70 and KSS function scores improved from 41 to 68 (P < .001). Mean arc of motion improved by 45° in patients who underwent complete component revision, 32° with component retention, and 29° with single component revision (P = .046). KSS knee scores improved by 34, 25, and 28 points in these respective groups (P = .049). KSS function scores improved by 33, 27, and 25 points (P = .077).

CONCLUSION

Revision surgery with or without component revision can improve motion and function in patients with stiffness after TKA. Complete component revision may offer the largest improvements in these outcome measures in properly selected patients.

The effect of a preoperative education class on the rate of manipulation under anesthesia after total knee arthroplasty in a veterans population

Background

Arthrofibrosis after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a common complication, potentially occurring in up to 25% of patients, and may be treated during the early recovery period by manipulation under anesthesia (MUA). The majority of preoperative factors that predispose patients to postoperative stiffness are patient specific and not modifiable. The United States Veteran Affairs is a particularly challenging group given a higher baseline rate of medical comorbidities and opioid dependence than the general population. Patient education about postoperative expectations and complications has been shown to improve outcomes in certain orthopedic procedures. This retrospective study aims to determine if preoperative counseling for veterans undergoing primary TKA reduces the rate of postoperative stiffness, and consequently MUA, in this subset of patients.

Methods

We evaluated the medical records of 244 veterans at a single veteran affairs hospital who underwent 278 TKAs during a 6-year period under one surgeon. Patients were separated into groups based on attendance in the preoperative counseling session. Effects of various factors, including age, sex, body mass index, preoperative knee range of motion, and history of previous knee surgery, were compared between these 2 cohorts.

Results

Attendance in the preoperative course did not have a statistically significant impact on the rate of manipulation (odds ratio [OR], 1.07). Female gender and prior manipulation had an increased OR of knee manipulation, whereas age > 65 years had a decreased OR that did not reach significance.

Conclusions

Our results show that preoperative counseling did not have a benefit in terms of postoperative MUA rates in veterans. Preoperative education may be helpful for setting appropriate expectations of pain, recovery, and function after total joint arthroplasty and may be useful in an online or video format in small practices in which cost may be prohibitive. Further studies are needed to determine whether they provide any benefit in postoperative arthrofibrosis rates.

Efficacy of Manipulation Under Anesthesia for Stiffness Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Knee stiffness following primary total knee arthroplasty can lead to unsatisfactory patient outcomes secondary to persistent pain and loss of function. Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) remains a viable option for treatment of post-operative stiffness. However, the optimal timing and clinical efficacy of manipulation of anesthesia remains unknown.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies that reported clinical outcomes for patients who underwent MUA for post-operative stiffness treatment. Repeat MUA procedures were included in the study but were analyzed separately.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies (1488 patients) reported on range of motion (ROM) after MUA, and 4 studies (81 patients) reported ROM after repeat MUA. All studies reported pre-MUA motion of less than 90°, while mean ROM at last follow-up exceeded 90° in all studies except 2. For studies reporting ROM improvement following repeat MUA, the mean pre-manipulation ROM was 80° and the mean post-manipulation ROM was 100.6°.

CONCLUSION

MUA remains an efficacious, minimally invasive treatment option for post-operative stiffness following TKA. MUA provides clinically significant improvement in ROM for most patients, with the best outcomes occurring in patients treated within 12 weeks post-operatively.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016052215.

Revision surgery for the stiff total knee arthroplasty

AIMS

The aim of this study was to examine the results of revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) undertaken for stiffness in the absence of sepsis or loosening.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We present the results of revision surgery for stiff TKA in 48 cases (35 (72.9%) women and 13 (27.1%) men). The mean age at revision surgery was 65.5 years (42 to 83). All surgeries were performed by a single surgeon. Stiffness was defined as an arc of flexion of < 70° or a flexion contracture of > 15°. The changes in the range of movement (ROM) and the Western Ontario and McMasters Osteoarthritis index scores (WOMAC) were recorded.

RESULTS

At a mean follow up of 59.9 months (12 to 272) there was a mean improvement in arc of movement of 45.0°. Mean flexion improved from 54.4° (5° to 100°) to 90° (10° to 125°) (p < 0.05) and the mean flexion contracture decreased from 12.0° (0° to 45°) to 3.5° (0° to 25°) (p < 0.05). The mean WOMAC scores improved for pain, stiffness and function. In patients with extreme stiffness we describe a novel technique, which we have called the 'sloppy' revision. This entails downsizing the polyethylene insert by 4 mm and using a more constrained liner to retain stability.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the largest series of revision surgeries for stiffness reported in the literature where infection and loosening have been excluded.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Whilst revision surgery is technically demanding, improvements in ROM and outcome can be achieved, particularly when the revision is within two years of the primary surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:622-7.