TY - JOUR
T1 - Secondary Patellar Resurfacing as a Rescue Procedure for Persistent Anterior Knee Pain After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty
T2 - Do Our Patients Really Improve?
AU - Toro-Ibarguen, Ainhoa Nekane
AU - Navarro-Arribas, Rafael
AU - Pretell, Juan Abelardo Augusto
AU - Prada-Cañizares, Alfonso Carlos
AU - Jara-Sánchez, Fernando
PY - 2016/7/1
Y1 - 2016/7/1
N2 - Background: Secondary patellar resurfacing (SPR) is a procedure that can be used in patients with persistent anterior knee pain (AKP) after a primary total knee arthroplasty. The aim of our study was to analyze the clinical and functional outcomes as well as the complications of this procedure and identify predictive factors for a favorable outcome. Methods: Forty-six patients who underwent SPR for persistent AKP after primary total knee arthroplasty were retrospectively studied. The patient's mean age was 68 years (range, 36-86 years). The average follow-up time after SPR was 74 months (range, 24-197 months). Demographic data, Knee Society Score scale, range of motion, pain improvement (Visual Analogue Scale), overall satisfaction, and complications were recorded. The statistical analysis was performed using STATA tm/SE v10. Results: There was an improvement of the Knee Society scale (from 54 ± 11 to 64 ± 16 points; P < .05). However, in 59% of the cases, there was no pain improvement, and 65% of patients were not satisfied. Four patients showed complications, and in 2 cases, reoperation was necessary. We did not find any preoperative predictive factor for a favorable outcome after SPR. Conclusion: Despite improvement of the Knee Society scale, many patients continue with AKP and are dissatisfied with this procedure; therefore, we do not recommend it in this clinical scenario.
AB - Background: Secondary patellar resurfacing (SPR) is a procedure that can be used in patients with persistent anterior knee pain (AKP) after a primary total knee arthroplasty. The aim of our study was to analyze the clinical and functional outcomes as well as the complications of this procedure and identify predictive factors for a favorable outcome. Methods: Forty-six patients who underwent SPR for persistent AKP after primary total knee arthroplasty were retrospectively studied. The patient's mean age was 68 years (range, 36-86 years). The average follow-up time after SPR was 74 months (range, 24-197 months). Demographic data, Knee Society Score scale, range of motion, pain improvement (Visual Analogue Scale), overall satisfaction, and complications were recorded. The statistical analysis was performed using STATA tm/SE v10. Results: There was an improvement of the Knee Society scale (from 54 ± 11 to 64 ± 16 points; P < .05). However, in 59% of the cases, there was no pain improvement, and 65% of patients were not satisfied. Four patients showed complications, and in 2 cases, reoperation was necessary. We did not find any preoperative predictive factor for a favorable outcome after SPR. Conclusion: Despite improvement of the Knee Society scale, many patients continue with AKP and are dissatisfied with this procedure; therefore, we do not recommend it in this clinical scenario.
KW - Anterior knee pain
KW - Knee arthroplasty
KW - Patellar resurfacing
KW - Revision arthroplasty
KW - Secondary patellar resurfacing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84962128087&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84962128087&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.arth.2016.01.001
DO - 10.1016/j.arth.2016.01.001
M3 - Article
C2 - 27038861
AN - SCOPUS:84962128087
VL - 31
SP - 1539
EP - 1543
JO - Journal of Arthroplasty
JF - Journal of Arthroplasty
SN - 0883-5403
IS - 7
ER -