Extensor mechanism disruption in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) occurs infrequently but often requires surgical intervention. We compared two cohorts undergoing extensor mechanism allograft reconstruction, one group had an extensor mechanism rupture, and the other had a recurrent ankylosed knee. Thirteen consecutive patients with extensor mechanism disruption or ankylosis after TKA were treated. Two different types of extensor mechanism allografts were used: quadriceps tendon-patella-patella tendon-tibial tubercle, and Achilles tendon allograft(Fig1). Demographic factors, diagnosis at extensor failure, Knee Society clinical rating scores, radiographs, and patient satisfaction were recorded. The average time from extensor mechanism disruption to surgery was 6.6 months (range, 1-24 months). At a mean followup of 24 months (range, 6-46 months), all patients were community ambulators. None of the patients showed a postoperative extensor lag. Average postoperative maximum flexion was 97° (90-115°) for the ruptured group and 80° (75-90) for the ankylosed grup. All patients thought their functional status had improved, and 87% were satisfied with the results of the allograft reconstruction (Fig 2, 3, 4, 5). One patient had allograft failure due to recurrent infection after re-revision for sepsis. The total extensor mechanism allograft and Achilles tendon allograft both were successful in the treatment of the failed extensor mechanism and showed promising results for the treatment of the ankylosed knee

Chronic extensor mechanism insufficiency around TKA is a very challenging pathology to treat. An insufficient extensor mechanism negatively affects implant survival and patient outcomes. There are several risk factors for extensor mechanism disruption and the surgeon should be aware and avoid these problems in the perioperative period. In appropriately selected patients, reconstruction of the extensor mechanism is a valid option. Whole extensor mechanism and Achilles tendon allograft reconstruction of the deficient extensor mechanism have been proposed with good early published results. These reconstructions, however, are expensive and with time may stretch and lead to recurrence of an extensor lag. An alternative to allograft, is the use of Marlex mesh as popularised by Browne and Hanssen. This technique uses a knitted monofilament polypropylene mesh that is secured to the patient's native lateral tissue and covered by an appropriately dissected and distalised vastus medialis muscle. The technique can be used for both patellar and quadriceps tendon deficiencies and can be done with or without implant revision and is currently the treatment of choice at the presenter's institution. The surgeon should be aware of the complexity and limitations of these three reconstructive techniques

Introduction. Active robotics for total knee Arthroplasty (TKA) uses a CAD-CAM approach to plan the correct size and placement of implants and to surgically achieve planned limb alignment. The TSolution One Total Knee Application (THINK Surgical Inc., Fremont, CA) is an open-implant platform, CT-based active robotic surgical system. A multi-center, prospective, non-randomized clinical trial was performed to evaluate safety and effectiveness of robotic-assisted TKA using the TSolution One Total Knee Application. This report details the findings from the IDE. Methods. Patients had to be ≥ 21 years old with BMI ≤ 40, Kellgren-Lawrence Grade ≥ 3, coronal deformity ≤ 20°, and sagital flexion contracture ≤ 15° to participate. In addition to monitoring all adverse events (AE), a pre-defined list of relevant major AEs (medial collateral ligament injury, extensor mechanism disruption, neural deficit, periprosthetic fracture, patellofemoral dislocation, tibiofemoral dislocation, vascular injury) were specifically identified to evaluate safety. Bleeding complications were also assessed. Malalignment rate, defined as the percentage of patients with more than a ± 3° difference in varus-valgus alignment from the preoperative plan, was used to determine accuracy of the active robotic system. Knee Society Scores (KSS) and Short Form 12 (SF-12) Health Surveys were assessed as clinical outcome measures. Results were compared to published values associated with manual TKA. Results. A total of 115 patients were enrolled at 6 US centers and followed for a maximum of 12 months after surgery. Mean surgical time (incision to close) improved consistently as the technique evolved (first 10 cases = 131.5 min, first 20 cases = 122.4 min), with mean robot time = 45.8 min. The incidence of pre-defined AEs identified was 0%, serving as a measure of safety of the procedure. Outside of the pre-defined list, only one AE was definitely associated with the use of the device; a metal tack was left inside the knee joint but no reoperation was performed. No patients required a blood transfusion. Alignment outside of the ± 3° goal was 11.2% with a difference of 0.5° ± 1.9° (mean ± STD), which represents a 43% statistically significant (posterior probability > 0.95) reduction in malalignment compared to the literature. Mean KSS Functional scores improved from 40.2 at baseline to 65.4 at 3 months, mean KSS Objective scores improved from 46.9 to 71.2, mean KSS Patient Satisfaction scores improved from 14.5 to 30.6, and mean SF-12 Physical Component scores improved from 32.9 to 43.5. Discussion. The TSolution One Total Knee Application is descended from an active robotic system used in >8000 cases outside the United States since 2002. This trial represents the first US based study of this technology for primary TKA. The clinical study demonstrated positive safety outcomes as none of the seven pre-defined AEs were observed and there were no cases requiring transfusion. A positive effectiveness outcome was also demonstrated as the malalignment rate found in this study showed a substantial reduction from the 32% malalignment rate published in the literature for conventional instruments. KSS and SF-12 scores were comparable to other published TKA series. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Achievement of adequate exposure in revision total knee arthroplasty is critical as it reduces the surgical time, enhances the ability for both component removal and reconstruction, and avoids devastating complications such as extensor mechanism disruption. However, this can be challenging as prior multiple surgeries and limited mobility contribute to a loss of tissue elasticity, thickened capsular envelope, and peri-articular soft tissue adhesions. A thorough pre-operative assessment of a patient's past surgical history, comorbidities, pre-operative radiographs (i.e. the presence of severe patella baja), and physical examination including range of motion, prior incisions, and soft tissue pliability are useful in determining the appropriate surgical techniques necessary for a successful revision. A systematic approach to the ankylosed knee is critical. Most techniques are geared towards mobilization of the extensor mechanism to safely displace the patella for component exposure. The initial exposure should consist of a long skin incision, a subperiosteal medial release, and debridement of suprapatellar, medial, and lateral adhesions to the femoral condyles. A lateral capsular release can prove helpful in further mobilization of the extensor mechanism. When performing a medial parapatellar arthrotomy it's important to keep in mind further extensile exposure techniques that may be required. For example, the arthrotomy should not extend proximally into the vastus intermedius or rectus femoris in the event that a quadriceps snip technique is to be used as this can compromise the ability to repair this exposure. Despite a large exposure and release of adhesions, sometimes the extensor mechanism remains at risk of rupture and adequate visualization cannot be obtained. In this event, extensile exposures such as a quadriceps snip, quadriceps turndown or tibial tubercle osteotomy are considered. The location of the patella often dictates the best exposure option as severe patella baja may not be overcome with a proximally based release. The quadriceps snip is most commonly used and provides improved exposure without the necessity of modifying the patient's post-operative rehabilitation. In addition, it can be extended to a quadriceps turndown which vastly improves visualization, but at the expense of needing to immobilise the knee post-operatively. A tibial tubercle osteotomy can also be used and provides excellent exposure especially in the case of severe patella baja or when removal of a cemented tibial stem is required. It preserves the extensor muscles, but risks include increased post-operative wound drainage due to limited soft tissue coverage, failure of fixation, or fracture of the tibial tubercle fragment or tibial shaft. Exposure in revision total knee arthroplasty is critical. Fortunately, this can be reliably achieved with a systematic approach to the knee and through the use of several extensile exposures at the surgeon's discretion

Whether or not to resurface the patella in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. Several methods of dealing with the patella exist: ALWAYS resurface; NEVER resurface; SOMETIMES resurface. There is good reason to consider selective patellar resurfacing. First, in an age of partial knee arthroplasty we have become more tuned in to analyzing patterns of arthritis. In TKA there is a high percentage of patients who do not have significant patellar cartilage wear or anterolateral knee pain. These patients may be candidates for leaving the patella unresurfaced in TKA. Arno et al found that 42% of patients had no significant patellar arthritis at the time of TKA. Roberts et al found that only 15% of patients should undergo patella resurfacing based on the presence of exposed bone on the patella; the other 85% could be considered suitable for leaving the patella unresurfaced. Second, despite a cumulative incidence of less than 5–10%, problems related to patellar resurfacing account for perhaps the most catastrophic complications encountered, with treatments that have limited success. These complications include fracture, avascular necrosis, extensor mechanism disruption, and anterior knee pain. Third, it is a fallacy to think that anterior knee pain (AKP) does not exist despite primary patellar resurfacing in TKA. Meftah (Ranawat) et al found that AKP persists in 30% of patients and new AKP develops in 10% of patients after TKA with patellar resurfacing. Barrack et al found that with patellar resurfacing the incidence of AKP is 28% in patients without preop AKP and 9% in those with preop AKP. They also found that without patellar resurfacing the incidence of new AKP was 14% and persistent AKP was 23%. Fourth, only roughly 44–64% of patients who undergo secondary patellar resurfacing for AKP after TKA with an unresurfaced patella actually get relief of their pain, suggesting that there is some other etiology of anterior knee pain. Residual component malalignment, boxy femoral components, PF overstuffing, referred pain or asymmetric resurfacing may explain ongoing pain. Finally, the data in well-designed studies show that selective patellar resurfacing can produce similar outcomes with and without resurfacing, particularly in those without significant patellar arthritis. In multiple studies, higher rates of secondary surgery occur when the patella is left unresurfaced in primary TKA, but this is for “pain” without clear etiology. On the other hand secondary surgery is rarely performed in TKA with patellar resurfacing for “pain” only, despite its high incidence. The quality of patellar cartilage at the time of primary TKA should be considered, as that may be the best indicator of whether a knee will do well without patellar resurfacing (that is, selective patellar resurfacing may be a better idea than never resurfacing the patella). While patellar resurfacing remains controversial in modern TKA, excellent outcomes are achievable with, and without, primary patellar resurfacing. Selectively leaving the patella unresurfaced when there is limited patellar arthritis may not only be highly effective, but it may also limit the incidence of secondary resurfacing that may occur with more substantial patellar arthritis while also minimizing the risk of some of the devastating complications that can occur due to patellar resurfacing in TKA