Optimal management of acute patellar dislocation is still a topic of debate. Although, conventionally it has been managed by non-operative measures, recent literature recommends operative treatment to prevent re-dislocations. Our study recommends that results of non-operative measures comparable to that of operative management. Our study is the retrospective with 46 consecutive patients (47 knees) of first time patellar dislocation managed between 2012 and 2014. The study methodology highlighted upon the etiology, mechanism of injury and other characteristics of first time dislocations and also analysed outcomes of conservative management including re-dislocation rates. The duration of follow up ranged from 1 to 4 years. Average age at first-time dislocation was 23 years (Range 10–62 years). Male:Female ratio was 30:17. Twisting injury was the commonest cause. 1 patient required open reduction but all others relocated spontaneously or had successful closed reduction. Medial Patello-Femoral Ligament injury was frequent associated feature. 11 knees Conservative management of primary patellar dislocation is successful in majority of patients. Surgery should be reserved for the carefully selected patients with specific indications.
Distal femoral replacement is an operation long considered as salvage operation for neoplastic conditions. Outcomes of this procedure for difficult knee revisions with bone loss of distal femur have been sparsely reported. We present the early results of complex revision knee arthroplasty using distal femoral replacement implant, performed for severe osteolysis and bone loss. Retrospective review of clinic and radiological results of 25 consecutive patients operated at single centre between January 2010 and December 2014. All patients had single type of implant. All data was collected till the latest follow up. Re-revision for any reason was considered as primary end point. Mean age at surgery was 72.2 years (range 51 – 85 years). Average number of previous knee replacements was 2.28 (range 1 to 6). Most common indications were infection, aseptic loosening and peri-prosthetic fracture. Average follow up was 24.5 months (range: 3–63 months). 1 patient died 8 months post-op due to unrelated reasons. Re-revision rate was 2/25 (8%) during this period. One was re-revised for aseptic loosening and one was revised for peri-prosthetic fracture of femur. Two other peri-prosthetic fractures were managed by open reduction and internal fixation. All 3 peri-prosthetic fractures occurred with low energy trauma. It is noteworthy that there was no hinge or mechanical failures of the implant. Peri-prosthetic fracture in 12% of patients in this series is of concern. There are no similar studies to compare this data with. The length of the stem, type of fixation of the stem, weight of the distal femoral component of implant can be postulated as factors contributing to risk of peri-prosthetic fracture.