title: Retrospective 5-Year Analysis of Revision Rate and Functional Outcome of TKA With and Without Patella Implant.
abstract: The aim of this study was to compare a patient cohort after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in terms of the revision rate and the functional outcome, with and without patella resurfacing. Sixty-six patients (71 TKAs) were implanted with the mobile-bearing knee prosthesis system e.motion UC (Aesculap AG, Tuttlingen, Germany). These patients were divided into 2 groups, 1 of which received primary patella resurfacing (PPR; 51 TKAs) and 1 of which did not (non-PPR; 20 TKAs), with an average follow-up of 65.6 months (±6.9). The cohort was recorded consecutively. The evaluation was performed using the Knee Society Score and selected questions relating to the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, as well as with radiographs. Results showed that PPR was no better than non-PPR in terms of functional outcome. Two knees (10%) were revised in the non-PPR group, and 1 knee (1.96%) in the PPR group (not significant). In this cohort, 100% of implants, including the 5 TKAs of patients who did not attend the follow-up examination, had neither explanted nor loosened at the time of follow-up examination. The authors concluded that the revision rate for PPR is slightly lower, and this avoids the need for secondary patella resurfacing. The risk for complications is low, and the functional outcome is comparable. [Orthopedics. 2016; 39(3):S31-S35.].
authors.forename: Dominique C
authors.initials: DC
authors.lastname: Albrecht
authors.forename: Andreas
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Ottersbach
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D019645:Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007592:Joint Diseases / Q000601:surgery*; D007719:Knee Joint / Q000601:surgery*; D007720:Knee Prosthesis; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010329:Patella / Q000601:surgery*; D020127:Recovery of Function; D012086:Reoperation; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016896:Treatment Outcome