We have compared the time to recovery of isokinetic quadriceps strength after total knee replacement (TKR) using three different lengths of incision in the quadriceps. We prospectively randomised 60 patients into one of the three groups according to the length of incision in the quadriceps above the upper border of the patella (2 cm, 4 cm or 6 cm). The strength of the knees was measured pre-operatively and every month post-operatively until the peak quadriceps torque returned to its pre-operative level.

There was no significant difference in the mean operating time, blood loss, hospital stay, alignment or pre-operative isokinetic quadriceps strength between the three groups. Using the Kaplan–Meier method, group A had a similar mean recovery time to group B (2.0 ± 0.2 vs 2.5 ± 0.2 months, p = 0.176). Group C required a significantly longer recovery time (3.4 ± 0.3 months) than the other groups (p < 0.03). However, there were no significant differences in the mean Oxford knee scores one year post-operatively between the groups.

We conclude that an incision of up to 4 cm in the quadriceps does not delay the recovery of its isokinetic strength after TKR.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:902–6.

Patient-specific cutting guides (PSCGs) are designed to improve the accuracy of alignment of total knee replacement (TKR). We compared the accuracy of limb alignment and component positioning after TKR performed using PSCGs or conventional instrumentation. A total of 80 patients were randomised to undergo TKR with either of the different forms of instrumentation, and radiological outcomes and peri-operative factors such as operating time were assessed. No significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of tibiofemoral angle or femoral component alignment. Although the tibial component in the PSCGs group was measurably closer to neutral alignment than in the conventional group, the size of the difference was very small (89.8° (sd 1.2) vs 90.5° (sd 1.6); p = 0.030). This new technology slightly shortened the bone-cutting time by a mean of 3.6 minutes (p < 0.001) and the operating time by a mean 5.1 minutes (p = 0.019), without tangible differences in post-operative blood loss (p = 0.528) or need for blood transfusion (p = 0.789). This study demonstrated that both PSCGs and conventional instrumentation restore limb alignment and place the components with the similar accuracy. The minimal advantages of PSCGs in terms of consistency of alignment or operative time are unlikely to be clinically relevant.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:354–9.