Aims

Debate remains whether the patella should be resurfaced during total knee replacement (TKR). For non-resurfaced TKRs, we estimated what the revision rate would have been if the patella had been resurfaced, and examined the risk of re-revision following secondary patellar resurfacing.

Strategy regarding patella resurfacing in total knee replacement (TKR) remains controversial. TKR revision rates are reportedly influenced by surgeon procedure volume. The study aim was to compare revision outcomes of TKR with and without patella resurfacing in different surgeon volume groups using data from the AOANJRR. The study population included 571,149 primary TKRs for osteoarthritis. Surgeons were classified as low, medium, or high-volume based on the quartiles of mean primary TKR volume between 2011 and 2020. Cumulative percent revision (CPR) using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship were calculated for the three surgeon volume groups with and without patella resurfacing. Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for age and sex, were used to compare revision risks. High-volume surgeons who did not resurface the patella had the highest all-cause CPR (20-year CPR 10.9%, 95% CI [10.0%, 12.0%]). When the patella was resurfaced, high-volume surgeons had the lowest revision rate (7.3%, 95% CI [6.4%, 8.4%]). When the high-volume groups were compared there was a higher rate of revision for the non-resurfaced group after 6 months. When the medium-volume surgeon groups were compared, not resurfacing the patella also was associated with a higher rate of revision after 3 months. The low-volume comparisons showed an initial higher rate of revision with patella resurfacing, but there was no difference after 3 months. When only patella revisions were considered, there were higher rates of revision in all three volume groups where the patella was not resurfaced. TKR performed by high and medium-volume surgeons without patella resurfacing had higher revision rates compared to when the patella was resurfaced. Resurfacing the patella in the primary procedure protected against revision for patella reasons in all surgeon volume groups. Level of evidence: III (National registry analysis)

There is a lack of evidence surrounding selective patella resurfacing, but patella cartilage loss at time of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is often used as an indication in those who perform it. This study compares the outcomes of TKA without patella resurfacing in patients with and without patella cartilage loss (PFOA). Prospective case control study of 209 consecutive patients undergoing cruciate retaining single radius TKA without patella resurfacing for KL≥3 osteoarthritis. The presence and location of full thickness patella cartilage loss was documented intra-operatively at TKA, identifying n=108 cases with PFOA (mean age 70±9.7, mean BMI 31±6.2, 72 (67%) female) Vs n=101 controls without PFOA (age 68±9.2, BMI31±5.6, 52 (51%) female). Primary outcome measure was improvement in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) at one year. There were more females in the PFOA group (67% Vs 51%, p=0.037), but no other preoperative differences. There was no difference in preoperative OKS between patients with patella cartilage loss (20.6±7.9) and those without (21.0±7.2, p=0.720). There was no difference in OKS improvement following TKA without patella resurfacing between those with full thickness patella cartilage loss (14.2±9.8) and those without (15.4±9.5, p=0.365). Facet involvement (number and location) did not affect OKSs. No differences were found in the individual OKS questions between groups (p>0.05). There was no difference in one-year OKS or improvements therein between patients with and without full thickness patella cartilage loss treated with single radius cruciate retaining TKA without patella resurfacing, questioning its use an indication for selective patella resurfacing

Resurfacing the patella is performed the majority of the time in the United States and in many regions it is considered standard practice. In many countries, however, the patella is left un-resurfaced an equal amount of the time or even rarely ever resurfaced. Patella resurfacing is not a simple or benign procedure. There are numerous negative sequelae of resurfacing including loosening, fragmentation, avascular necrosis, lateral facet pain, stress fracture, acute fracture, late fracture, and restricted motion. In a study by Berend, Ritter, et al, failures of the patella component were reported 4.2% of the time at an average of only 2.6 years. A study was undertaken at Washington University in recent years to determine rather more clinical problems were observed following total knee replacement with or without patella resurfacing. Records were maintained on all problem total knees cases with well localised anterior knee pain. The referral area for this clinic is St. Louis which is among the largest American cities, with the highest percentage of total knees that are performed without patella resurfacing. During 4 years of referrals of total knee patients with anterior knee pain, 47 cases were identified of which 36 had a resurfaced patella and 11 had a non-resurfaced patella. Eight of 36 resurfaced patellae underwent surgery while only 2 of 11 non-resurfaced patellae underwent subsequent surgery. More than 3 times as many painful total knees that were referred for evaluation had already had their patella resurfaced. In spite of the fact that approximately equal number of total knees were performed in this area without patella resurfacing, far more patients presented to clinic with painful total knee in which the patella had been resurfaced. The numerous pathologies requiring a treatment following patella resurfacing included patella loosening, fragmentation of the patella, avascular necrosis patella, late stress fracture, lateral facet pain, oblique resurfacing, and too thick of a patellar composite. In a large multi-center randomised clinical trial at 5 years from the United Kingdom in over 1700 knees from 34 centers and 116 surgeons, there was no difference in the Oxford Score, SF-12, EQ-5D, or need for further surgery or complications. The authors concluded, “We see no difference in any score, if there is a difference, it is too small to be of any clinical significance”. In a prospective of randomised clinical trial performed at Tulane University over 20 years ago, no differences were observed in knee score, a functional patella questionnaire, or the incidence of anterior knee pain between resurfaced and un-resurfaced patellae at time intervals of 2–4 years, 5–7 years, or greater than 10 years. Beyond 10 years the knee scores of total knee patients with a resurfaced patella had declined significantly greater than those with a non-resurfaced patella. There are numerous advantages of not resurfacing the patella including less surgical time, less expense, a lower risk of “major” complications (especially late complications), and if symptoms develop in an un-resurfaced patella, it is an easier salvage situation with more options available. A small percentage of total knee patients will be symptomatic whether or not their patella is resurfaced. Not resurfacing the patella retains more options and has fewer complications. The major determinant of clinical result and the presence of anterior knee pain after knee replacement is surgical technique and component design not whether or not the patella is resurfaced. Patella resurfacing is occasionally necessary for patients with inflammatory arthritis, a deformed or maltracking patella, or symptoms and pathology that are virtually restricted to the patellofemoral joint. For the vast majority of patients, however, patella resurfacing is not necessary

Resurfacing the patella is performed the majority of the time in the US and in many regions it is considered standard practice. In many countries, however, the patella is left unresurfaced an equal amount of the time or even rarely ever resurfaced. Patella resurfacing is not a simple or benign procedure. There are numerous negative sequelae of resurfacing including loosening, fragmentation, avascular necrosis, lateral facet pain, stress fracture, acute fracture, late fracture, and restricted motion. In a study by Berend, Ritter, et al, failures of the patella component were reported 4.2% of the time at an average of only 2.6 years. A study was undertaken at Washington University in recent years to determine whether more clinical problems were observed following total knee replacement with or without patella resurfacing. Records were maintained on all problem total knees cases with well localised anterior knee pain. The referral area for this clinic is St. Louis which is among the largest American cities, with the highest percentage of total knees that are performed without patella resurfacing. During 4 years of referrals of total knee patients with anterior knee pain, 47 cases were identified of which 36 had a resurfaced patella and 11 had a non-resurfaced patella. Eight of 36 resurfaced patellae underwent surgery while only 2 of 11 non-resurfaced patellae underwent subsequent surgery. More than 3 times as many painful total knees that were referred for evaluation had already had their patella resurfaced. In spite of the fact that approximately equal number of total knees were performed in this area without patella resurfacing, far more patients presented to clinic with painful total knee in which the patella had been resurfaced. The numerous pathologies requiring a treatment following patella resurfacing included patella loosening, fragmentation of the patella, avascular necrosis patella, late stress fracture, lateral facet pain, oblique resurfacing, and too thick of a patellar composite. In a large multi-center randomised clinical trial at 5 years from the United Kingdom in over 1700 knees from 34 centers and 116 surgeons, there was no difference in the Oxford Score, SF-12, EQ-5D, or need for further surgery or complications. The authors concluded, “We see no difference in any score, if there is a difference, it is too small to be of any clinical significance”. In a prospective randomised clinical trial performed at Tulane University over 20 years ago, no differences were observed in knee score, a functional patella questionnaire, or the incidence of anterior knee pain between resurfaced and unresurfaced patellae at time intervals of 2–4 years, 5–7 years, or greater than 10 years. Beyond 10 years the knee scores of total knee patients with a resurfaced patella had declined significantly greater than those with a non-resurfaced patella. There are numerous advantages of not resurfacing the patella including less surgical time, less expense, a lower risk of “major” complications (especially late complications), and if symptoms develop in an unresurfaced patella, it is an easier salvage situation with more options available. A small percentage of total knee patients will be symptomatic whether or not their patella is resurfaced. Not resurfacing the patella retains more options and has fewer complications. The major determinant of clinical result and the presence of anterior knee pain after knee replacement is surgical technique and component design not whether or not the patella is resurfaced. Patella resurfacing is occasionally necessary for patients with inflammatory arthritis, a deformed or maltracking patella, or symptoms and pathology that are virtually restricted to the patellofemoral joint. For the vast majority of patients, however, patella resurfacing is not necessary

OBJECTIVES. The use of a mobile bearing has been suggested to decrease the rate of patellar complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, to resurface or retain the native patella remains debated. Few long-term results have been documented. The present retrospective study was designed to evaluate the long-term (more than 10 years) results of mobile bearing TKAs on a national scale, and to compare pain results and survivorship according to the status of the patella. The primary hypothesis of this study was that the 10 year survival rate of mobile bearing TKAs with patella resurfacing will be different from that of mobile bearing TKAs with native patella retaining. METHODS. All patients operated on between 2001 and 2004 in all participating centers for implantation of a TKA (whatever design used) were eligible for this study. Usual demographic and peri-operative items have been recorded. All patients were contacted after the 10 year follow-up for repeat clinical examination (Knee Society score (KSS), Oxford knee questionnaire). Patients who did not return were interviewed by phone call. For patients lost of follow-up, family or general practitioner was contacted to obtain relevant information about prosthesis survival. TKAs with resurfaced patella and TKAs with retained native patella were paired according to age, gender, body mass index and severity of the coronal deformation (with steps of 5°). Pain score, KSS and Oxford knee score were compared between two groups with a Student t-test at a 0.05 level of significance. Survival curve was plotted according to the actuarial technique, using the revision for mechanical reason as end-point. The influence of the patella status was assessed with a logrank test at a 0.05 level of significance. RESULTS. 1,604 TKAs were implanted during the study time-frame. 849 cases could be paired according to age, gender, BMI and severity of the pre-operative coronal deformation (2/1 ratio) into two groups: resurfaced patella (496 cases) and retained patella (243 cases). There was no difference in any baseline criteria between both groups. 150 patients deceased before the 10 year follow up (18%). Final follow-up was obtained for 489 cases (58%). 31 reoperations (prosthesis exchange or patellofemoral revision) were performed during the study time frame (4%), with 17 reoperations for mechanical reasons (3%). KSS and Oxford knee score were significantly higher for TKAs without patella resurfacing, there was a significant difference between the 13 year survival rates of TKAs with resurfaced patella (97%) and TKAs with retained native patella (93%). CONCLUSIONS. The primary hypothesis was confirmed: 10 year survival rate of mobile bearing TKAs with patella resurfacing was better than mobile bearing TKAs with native patella retaining. Patella resurfacing may lead to a better survival after mobile bearing TKA. However, the clinical results were better after patella resurfacing when the index TKA was not revised

Aims. The rate of day-case total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the UK is currently approximately 0.5%. Reducing length of stay allows orthopaedic providers to improve efficiency, increase operative throughput, and tackle the rising demand for joint arthroplasty surgery and the COVID-19-related backlog. Here, we report safe delivery of day-case TKA in an NHS trust via inpatient wards with no additional resources. Methods. Day-case TKAs, defined as patients discharged on the same calendar day as surgery, were retrospectively reviewed with a minimum follow-up of six months. Analysis of hospital and primary care records was performed to determine readmission and reattendance rates. Telephone interviews were conducted to determine patient satisfaction. Results. Since 2016, 301/7350 TKAs (4.1%) in 290 patients at our institution were discharged on the day of surgery. Mean follow-up was 31.4 months (6.2 to 70.0). In all, 28 patients (9.3%) attended the emergency department or other acute care settings within 90 days of surgery, most often with wound concerns or leg swelling; six patients (2.0%) were readmitted. No patients underwent a subsequent revision procedure, and there were no periprosthetic infections. Two patients (0.7%) underwent secondary patella resurfacing, and one patient underwent arthroscopic arthrolysis after previous manipulation under anaesthetic (MUA). Three patients (1.0%) underwent MUA alone. Primary care consultation records, available for 206 patients, showed 16 patients (7.8%) contacted their general practitioner within two weeks postoperatively; two (1.0%) were referred to secondary care. Overall, 115/121 patients (95%) telephoned stated they would have day-case TKA again. Conclusion. Day-case TKA can be safely delivered in the NHS with no additional resources. We found low incidence of contact with primary and secondary care in the postoperative period, and high patient satisfaction. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(8):621–627

Aims. Knee arthroplasty surgery is a highly effective treatment for arthritis and disorders of the knee. There are a wide variety of implant brands and types of knee arthroplasty available to surgeons. As a result of a number of highly publicized failures, arthroplasty surgery is highly regulated in the UK and many other countries through national registries, introduced to monitor implant performance, surgeons, and hospitals. With time, the options available within many brand portfolios have grown, with alternative tibial or femoral components, tibial insert materials, or shapes and patella resurfacings. In this study we have investigated the effect of the expansion of implant brand portfolios and where there may be a lack of transparency around a brand name. We also aimed to establish the potential numbers of compatible implant construct combinations. Methods. Hypothetical implant brand portfolios were proposed, and the number of compatible implant construct combinations was calculated. Results. A simple knee portfolio with cemented cruciate-retaining (CR) and posterior-stabilized (PS) components, with and without a patella, has four combinations. If there are two options available for each component, the numbers double for each option, resulting in 32 combinations. The effect of adding a third option multiplies the number by 1.3. Introducing compatible uncemented options, with the effect of hybrids, multiplies the number by 4. An implant portfolio with two femoral components (both in CR and PS), with two insert options and a patella, all in cemented and uncemented versions leads to 192 possible compatible implant construct combinations. There are implant brands available to surgeons with many more than two options. Conclusion. This study demonstrates that the addition of multiple variants within a knee brand portfolio leads to a large number (many hundreds) of compatible implant construct combinations. Revision rates of implant combinations are not currently reviewed at this level of granularity, leading to the risk of camouflage of true outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(10):1555–1560

We conducted a prospective, randomised and double blinded study to observe the recovery of knee function in 50 patients undergoing knee replacement with or without patella resurfacing. Patients were assessed pre-operatively, at four months and a minimum 18 months after surgery using three scoring systems, the Knee Society Clinical Outcome Score, WOMAC and the SF-36 health questionnaire. In addition the active range of knee movement when weight bearing was measured using an electrogoniometer. Patients were asked to undertake 11 standardised activities including level walking, stair climbing and getting into and out of low chairs. Patients were randomised at the time of surgery into receiving a knee replacement with or without patella resurfacing. Forty-two patients, (18 with patella resurfacing, 24 with no resurfacing) completed assessments at all time intervals. All patients in the study demonstrated an improvement in terms of pain relief and function by four months after knee replacement with a further but less significant improvement by 18 months. The active range of knee movement measured by electrogoniometry recovered to the pre-operative range for all activities but there was no increase in knee movement. Patients who had patella resurfacing had a significantly lower (p < 0.02) score on the Knee Society Clinical Outcome function score at 18 months compared to patients without patella resurfacing. There was no significant difference (p > 0.05) in the active range of knee movement with or without patella resurfacing, although patients with patella resurfacing in general had slightly poorer range of movement particularly for activities that required knee flexion beyond 70 degrees. We concluded that in this study knee function was not improved by patella resurfacing when compared to a matched group of patients without resurfacing. As patients recovery stabilises by 18 months it appears that the final functional outcome following knee replacement is not enhanced by patella resurfacing

Aim. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of a self aligning unidirectional mobile tibial bearing and the use of a patella button on lateral patella release rates within a knee system using a common femoral component for both the fixed and mobile variants. Methods and results. A total of 347 patients undergoing TKR were included in the study and randomly allocated to receive either a Mobile Bearing (171 knees) or a Fixed Bearing (176 knees) PS PFC Sigma TKR. Further sub-randomisation into patella resurfacing or retention was performed for both designs. The need for lateral patella release was assessed during surgery using the ‘no thumbs’ technique. The lateral release rate was similar for fixed bearing (9.65%) and mobile bearing (9.94%) implants (p=0.963). Patella resurfacing resulted in lower lateral release rates when compared to patella retention (5.8% vs 13.8%; p=0.0131). This difference was most marked in the mobile bearing group where the lateral release rate was 16.3% with patella retention compared to 3.5% with patella resurfacing (p=0.005). Conclusion. The addition of a rotating platform tibial component had no impact on the lateral release rate in this study. Optimising patella geometry by patella resurfacing appears more important than tibial bearing deisgn per se. The combination of a mobile bearing design and patella resurfacing appears to optimise the lateral release rate and patello-femoral tracking in the PS PFC Sigma design which has a deeply radiused trochlea on the femoral component. The results with a patella resurfacing confirm the results with this prosthesis reported by Pagnano et al in Clin Orthop 428 pp221-227

Deep infection is a devastating complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study aimed to determine if there was a relationship between surgeon volume and the incidence of revision for infection after primary TKA. Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) from 1 September 1999 to 31 December 2020 for primary TKA for osteoarthritis that were revised for infection. Surgeon volume was defined by the number of primary TKA procedures performed by the surgeon in the year the primary TKA was performed and grouped as <25, 25-49, 50-74, 75-99, >100 primary TKA procedures per year. Kaplan Meir estimates for cumulative percent revision (CPR) and Cox Proportional Hazard Ratios were performed to compare rates of revision for infection by surgeon volume, with sub-analyses for patella and polyethylene use, age <65 years and male gender. 5295 of 602,919 primary TKA for osteoarthritis were revised for infection. High volume surgeons (>100 TKA/year) had a significantly lower rate of revision for infection with a CPR at 1 and 17 years of 0.4% (95% CI 0.3, 0.4) and 1.5% (95% CI 1.2, 2.0), respectively, compared with 0.6% (95% CI 0.5, 0.7) and 2.1% (95% CI 1.8, 2.3), respectively, for low volume surgeons (<25 TKR/year). Differences between the high-volume group and the remaining groups remained when sub-analysis for age, gender, ASA, BMI, patella resurfacing and the use of cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE). High volume surgeons have lower rates of revision for infection in primary TKA

BACKGROUND. Patella resurfacing in TKA remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term clinical outcome in TKA in patients undergoing bilateral TKAs with one patella resurfaced and the other patella nonresurfaced. METHODS. Twenty-nine patients (58 knees) underwent primary bilateral TKA for osteoarthritis. These patients were enrolled in a prospective randomised double blinded study and represent a subset of a larger study of patella resurfacing. All patients received the same posterior cruciate sparing TKA. Patients each had one knee randomised to treatment with or without patella resurfacing. The contralateral knee then received the alternative patellar treatment, such that all patients had one knee with a resurfaced patella and the other nonresurfaced. Clinical evaluations consisted of routine radiographic and clinical follow-up and included with a Knee Society Score patellofemoral specific patient questionnaire. Twenty-eight patients (56 knees) participated and were followed for a mean of 118 months (range, 69–146 months). RESULTS. There were no significant differences between the knees treated with and without patellar resurfacing with regard to range of motion, KSCRS, or the pain and function scores. Forty-six percent (13/28 patients) of patients preferred the resurfaced knee, 36% (10/28) the nonresurfaced knee, and 18% (5/28) had no preference. Two patients (7%) in the nonresurfaced group required revision for a patellofemoral related complication, compared to one patient (3.5%) in the group with a resurfaced patella. CONCLUSIONS. Ten year follow-up reveals equivalent results for resurfaced and nonresurfaced patellae in TKA with regards to ROM, KSCRS, pain and function, or patellofemoral symptoms. In this large series of bilateral TKAs, 64% of patients either preferred the unresurfaced knee or had no preference

The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to investigate the reasons for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revisions at a tertiary hospital over a four-year period. The study aimed to identify the primary causes of TKA revisions and shed light on the implications for patient care and outcomes. The study included 31 patients who underwent revisions after primary knee arthroplasty between January 2017 and December 2020. A retrospective approach was employed, utilizing medical records and radiological findings to identify the reasons for TKA revisions. The study excluded oncology patients to focus on non-oncologic indications for revision surgeries. Patient demographics, including age and gender, were recorded. Data analysis involved categorizing the reasons for revision based on clinical assessments and radiological evidence. Among the 31 patients included in the study, 9 were males and 22 were females. The age of the patients ranged from 43 to 81, with a median age of 65 and an interquartile range of 18.5. The primary reasons for TKA revisions were identified as aseptic loosening (10 cases) and prosthetic joint infection (PJI) (13 cases). Additional reasons included revision from surgitech hemicap (1 case), patella osteoarthritis (1 case), stiffness (2 cases), patella maltracking (2 cases), periprosthetic fracture (1 case), and patella resurfacing (1 case). The findings of this retrospective cohort study highlight aseptic loosening and PJI as the leading causes of TKA revisions in the examined patient population. These results emphasize the importance of optimizing surgical techniques, implant selection, and infection control measures to reduce the incidence of TKA revisions. Future research efforts should focus on preventive strategies to enhance patient outcomes and mitigate the need for revision surgeries in TKA procedures

Abstract. Introduction. Total knee replacement (TKR) in patients with skeletal dysplasia is technically challenging surgery due to deformity, joint contracture, and associated co-morbidities. The aim of this study is to follow up patients with skeletal dysplasia following a TKR. Methodology. We retrospectively reviewed 22 patients with skeletal dysplasia who underwent 31 TKRs at our institution between 2006 and 2022. Clinical notes, operative records and radiographic data were reviewed. Results. Achondroplasia was the most common skeletal dysplasia (8), followed by Chondrodysplasia punctata (7) and Spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia (5). There were fourteen men and eight women with mean age of 51 years (28 to 73). The average height of patients was 1.4 metres (1.16–1.75) and the mean weight was 64.8 Kg (34.3–100). The mean follow up duration was 68.32 months (1–161). Three patients died during follow up. Custom implants were required in twelve patients (38.71%). Custom jigs were utilised in six patients and two patients underwent robotic assisted surgery. Hinged TKR was used in seventeen patients (54.84%), posterior stabilised TKR in nine patients (29.03%), and cruciate retaining TKR in five patients (16.13%). One patient underwent a patella resurfacing for persistent anterior knee pain and another had an intra-operative medial tibial plateau fracture which was managed with fixation. No revisions occurred during the follow up period. Conclusion. Despite the technical challenges and complexity of TKR within this unique patient group, we demonstrate good implant survivorship during the study period. Cross sectional imaging is recommended preoperatively for precise planning and templating

Abstract. Introduction. The rate of day-case total knee replacement (TKR) in the UK is currently ~0.5%. Reducing length of stay improves efficiency, increases operative throughput and tackles the rising demand for joint replacement surgery and the COVID-19 related backlog. We report safe delivery of day-case TKR in an NHS Trust via inpatient wards, with no additional resources. Methodology. Day-case TKRs, defined as patients discharged on the same calendar day as surgery, were retrospectively reviewed with a minimum follow-up of six-months. Analysis of hospital and primary care records was performed to determine readmission and reattendance rates. Telephone interviews were conducted to determine patient satisfaction. Results. Between 2016 and 2021, 301/7350 (4.1%) TKRs were discharged on the day of surgery. Mean follow-up was 31.4 (6.2–70.0) months. 28 (9.3%) patients attended Accident and Emergency or other acute care settings within 90-days of surgery; six (2.0%) patients were readmitted. No patients underwent a subsequent revision procedure. There were no prosthetic infections. Two patients underwent secondary patella resurfacing, and one patient underwent arthroscopic arthrolysis after previous manipulation under anaesthetic (MUA). Three patients underwent MUA alone. Primary care consultation records, available for 206 patients, showed 16 (7.8%) patients contacted their General Practitioner within two-weeks post-operatively; two (1.0%) were referred to secondary care. 115/121 (95%) patients telephoned stated they would have day-case TKR again. Conclusion. Day-case TKR can be safely delivered in the NHS with no additional resources. We found low incidence of contact with primary and secondary care in the post-operative period, and high patient satisfaction

This study aimed to analyze the effect of two different techniques of cement application: cement on bone surface (CoB) versus cement on bone surface and implant surface (CoBaI) on the short-term effect of radiolucent lines (RLL) in primary fully cemented total knee arthroplasties (TKA) with patella resurfacing. 379 fully cemented TKAs (318 patients) were included in this monocentric study. Preoperative and postoperative at week 4 and 12 month after surgery all patients had a clinical and radiological examination and were administered the Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Cement was applied in two different ways among the two study groups: cement on bone surface (CoB group) or cement on bone surface and implant surface (CoBaI group). The evaluation of the presence of RLL or osteolysis was done as previously described using the updated Knee Society Radiographic Evaluation System. The mean OKS and range of motion improved significantly in both groups at the 4-week and 12-month follow-up, with no significant difference between the groups (CoB vs. CoBaI). RLL were present in 4.7% in the whole study population and were significantly higher in the CoBaI group (10.5%) at the 4-week follow-up. At the 12-month follow-up RLL were seen in 29.8% of the TKAs in the CoBaI group, whereas the incidence was lower in the CoB group (24.0% (n.s.)). There were two revisions in each group. None of these due to aseptic loosening. Our study indicated that the application of bone cement on bone surface only might be more beneficial than onto the bone surface and onto the implant surface as well in respect to the short-term presence of RLL in fully cemented primary TKA. The long-term results will be of interest, especially in respect to aseptic loosening and might guide future directions of bone cement applications in TKA

Joint registries suggest a downward trend in the use of uncemented Total Knee Replacements (TKR) since 2003, largely related to reports of early failures of uncemented tibial and patella components. Advancements in uncemented design such as trabecular metal may improve outcomes, but there is a scarcity of high-quality data from randomised trials. 319 patients <75 years of age were randomised to either cemented or uncemented TKR implanted using computer navigation. Patellae were resurfaced in all patients. Patient outcome scores, re-operations and radiographic analysis of radiolucent lines were compared. Two year follow up was available for 287 patients (144 cemented vs 143 uncemented). There was no difference in operative time between groups, 73.7 v 71.1 mins (p= 0.08). There were no statistical differences in outcome scores at 2 years, Oxford knee score 42.5 vs 41.8 (p=0.35), International Knee Society 84.6 vs 84.0 (p=0.76), Forgotten Joint Score 66.7 vs 66.4 (p=0.91). There were two revisions, both for infection one in each group (0.33%). 13 cemented and 8 uncemented knees underwent re-operation, the majority of these being manipulation under anaesthetic (85.7%), with no difference (8.3% vs 5.3%, 95% CI -2.81% to 8.89%, p = 0.31). No difference was found in radiographic analysis at 2 years, 1 lucent line was seen in the cemented group and 3 in the uncemented group (0.67% v 2.09%, 95%CI -4.1% to 1.24%, p = 0.29). We found no difference in clinical or radiographic outcomes between cemented and uncemented TKR including routine patella resurfacing at two years. Early results suggest there is no difference between cemented and uncemented TKR at 2 years with reference to survivorship, patient outcomes and radiological parameters

Aim: The aim of the study was to assess the impact of a self aligning unidirectional mobile bearing TKR on lateral patella release rates within a knee system using a common femoral component for both the fixed and mobile variants. Methods and Results: A total of 357 patients undergoing TKR were randomly allocated to receive either a Mobile Bearing (181 knees) or a Fixed Bearing (176 knees) PSTKR. Further sub-randomisation into patella resurfacing or retention was performed for both designs. The need for lateral patella release was assessed during surgery. The lateral release rate was similar for fixed bearing (9%) and mobile bearing (9%) implants (p=0.95). Patella resurfacing resulted in lower lateral release rates when compared to patella retention (5.5% vs 13.5%; p=0.012). This difference was most marked in the mobile bearing group where the lateral release rate was 16% with patella retention compared to 3% with patella resurfacing (p=0.009). Conclusion: The addition of a rotating platform tibial component has had no impact on the lateral release rate in this study. Optimising patella geometry by patella resurfacing appears more important than tibial bearing deisgn per se. The combination of a mobile bearing design and patella resurfacing appears the optimise patello-femoral tracking

Whether to resurface the patella during a primary Total Knee Replacement (TKR) performed as a treatment of degenerative osteoarthritis remain a controversial issue. Patellar resurfacing was introduced because early implants were not designed to accommodate the native patella in an anatomic fashion during the range of motion. Complications related to patella resurfacing became a primary concern and have been associated with the variable revision rates often report post TKR. Subsequent modifications in implant design have been made to offer the surgeon option of leaving the patella un-resurfaced. Numerous clinical trials have been done to determine the superiority of each option. Unfortunately, there is little consensus and surgeon preference remains the primary variable. One of the major reasons given to support patella resurfacing is to eliminate Anterior Knee Pain post operatively. However, studies have shown that this problem was not exclusively found in non-resurfaced patients so the author conclude that anterior knee pain is probably related to component design or to the details of the surgical technique, such as component rotation rather that whether or not the patella is resurfaced. An increasing rate of complications with the extensor mechanism after patellar resurfacing led to the concept of selective resurfacing of the patella in TKR. Decision making algorithms with basis of clinical, radiographic and intraoperative parameters have been developed to determine which patients are suitable for patella resurfacing and which are suitable for patella non-resurfacing. Finally, the continued study of this topic with longer follow up term in randomized, controlled, clinical trials remains essential in our understanding of patella in TKR. The development of joint registry will allow surgeons to draw conclusions on the basis of larger numbers of patients and will improve the reporting of the results of patellar non resurfacing in clinical trials. In general, surgeons in United States always resurface while their counterparts in Europe tend to never resurface