Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1586 - 1594
1 Oct 2021
Sharma N Rehmatullah N Kuiper JH Gallacher P Barnett AJ

Aims

The Oswestry-Bristol Classification (OBC) is an MRI-specific assessment tool to grade trochlear dysplasia. The aim of this study is to validate clinically the OBC by demonstrating its use in selecting treatments that are safe and effective.

Methods

The OBC and the patellotrochlear index were used as part of the Oswestry Patellotrochlear Algorithm (OPTA) to guide the surgical treatment of patients with patellar instability. Patients were assigned to one of four treatment groups: medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFLr); MPFLr + tibial tubercle distalization (TTD); trochleoplasty; or trochleoplasty + TTD. A prospective analysis of a longitudinal patellofemoral database was performed. Between 2012 and 2018, 202 patients (233 knees) with a mean age of 24.2 years (SD 8.1), with recurrent patellar instability were treated by two fellowship-trained consultant sports/knee surgeons at The Robert Jones and Agnes Hunt Orthopaedic Hospital. Clinical efficacy of each treatment group was assessed by Kujala, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) scores at baseline, and up to 60 months postoperatively. Their safety was assessed by complication rate and requirement for further surgery. The pattern of clinical outcome over time was analyzed using mixed regression modelling.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 94-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1641 - 1648
1 Dec 2012
Baker PN Jameson SS Deehan DJ Gregg PJ Porter M Tucker K

Current analysis of unicondylar knee replacements (UKRs) by national registries is based on the pooled results of medial and lateral implants. Consequently, little is known about the differential performance of medial and lateral replacements and the influence of each implant type within these pooled analyses. Using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales (NJR) we aimed to determine the proportion of UKRs implanted on the lateral side of the knee, and their survival and reason for failure compared with medial UKRs. By combining information on the side of operation with component details held on the NJR, we were able to determine implant laterality (medial versus lateral) for 32 847 of the 35 624 unicondylar replacements (92%) registered before December 2010. Of these, 2052 (6%) were inserted on the lateral side of the knee. The rates of survival at five years were 93.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 92.7 to 93.5) for medial and 93.0% (95% CI 91.1 to 94.9) for lateral UKRs (p = 0.49). The rates of failure remained equivalent after adjusting for patient age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, indication for surgery and implant design using Cox’s proportional hazards method (hazard ratio for lateral relative to medial replacement = 0.88 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.13); p = 0.32). Aseptic loosening/lysis and unexplained pain were the main reasons for revision in both groups, although the reasons did vary depending on whether a mobile- or a fixed-bearing design was used. At a maximum of eight years the mid-term survival rates of medial and lateral UKRs are similar.