Harshvardhan Chawla

Why do patellofemoral arthroplasties fail today? A systematic review

BACKGROUND Historically poor results of patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) were reported in the setting of isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis (OA). In order to lower PFA failure rates, it is important to identify failure modes using a standardized method. In this systematic review, PFA failure modes were assessed and compared in early vs. late failures and older vs. recent studies. METHODS Databases of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane and annual registries were searched for studies reporting PFA failures. Failure modes in studies with mean follow-up <5years were classified as early failures while >5years were classified late failures. Cohorts started before 2000 were classified as older studies and started after 2000 as recent studies. RESULTS Thirty-nine cohort studies (10 level II and 29 level III or IV studies) and three registries were included with overall low quality of studies (GRADE criteria). A total of 938 PFA failures were included and were caused by OA progression (38%), pain (16%), aseptic loosening (14%) and patellar maltracking (10%). Pain was responsible for most early failures (31%), while OA progression was most common in late failures (46%). In older studies, OA progression was more commonly reported as failure mode than in more recent studies (53% vs. 39%, p=0.005). CONCLUSION This level IV systematic review with low quality of studies identified OA progression and pain as major failure modes. Reviewing these studies, appropriate patient selection could prevent PFA failures in select cases. Future studies assessing the role of PFA in isolated patellofemoral OA are necessary.

Annual revision rates of partial versus total knee arthroplasty: A comparative meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Utilization of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) as alternatives to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (OA) has increased. However, no single resource consolidates survivorship data between TKA and partial resurfacing options for each variant of unicompartmental OA. This meta-analysis compared survivorship between TKA and medial UKA (MUKA), lateral UKA (LUKA) and PFA using annual revision rate as a standardized metric. METHODS A systematic literature search was performed for studies quantifying TKA, MUKA, LUKA and/or PFA implant survivorship. Studies were classified by evidence level and assessed for bias using the MINORS and PEDro instruments. Annual revision rates were calculated for each arthroplasty procedure as percentages/observed component-year, based on a Poisson-normal model with random effects using the R-statistical software package. RESULTS One hundred and twenty-four studies (113 cohort and 11 registry-based studies) met inclusion/exclusion criteria, providing data for 374,934 arthroplasties and 14,991 revisions. The overall evidence level was low, with 96.7% of studies classified as level III-IV. Annual revision rates were lowest for TKA (0.49%, CI 0.41 to 0.58), followed by MUKA (1.07%, CI 0.87 to 1.31), LUKA (1.13%, CI 0.69 to 1.83) and PFA (1.75%, CI 1.19 to 2.57). No difference was detected between revision rates for MUKA and LUKA (p=0.222). CONCLUSIONS Revisions of MUKA, LUKA and PFA occur at an annual rate of 2.18, 2.31 and 3.57-fold that of TKA, respectively. These estimates may be used to inform clinical decision-making, guide patient expectations and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of total versus partial knee replacement in the setting of unicompartmental OA.

Patients with isolated lateral osteoarthritis: Unicompartmental or total knee arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND Lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are both reliable treatment options for patients with isolated lateral osteoarthritis (OA). However, studies comparing both procedures are scarce. Aims of this study were to (I) compare short-term functional outcomes following lateral UKA and TKA and (II) assess the role of patient characteristics on outcomes as measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). METHODS In this retrospective cohort study, 82 patients (48 undergoing lateral UKA and 34 undergoing TKA) were identified that presented with lateral OA and completed the WOMAC. Independent t-tests were used to compare outcomes following lateral UKA and TKA. RESULTS Mean follow-up was 2.8 years (range: 2.0 - 5.0 years). Preoperatively, no differences between lateral UKA and TKA were seen (50.1±13.5 and 53.3±17.1, respectively, p=0.551). Postoperatively, lateral UKA patients reported better overall outcomes than TKA (90.5±11.7 vs. 81.8±17.9, p=0.017). Subgroup analysis showed better outcomes following lateral UKA than TKA in patients younger than 75 years (92.1±9.9 vs. 81.3±19.6, p=0.014) and in females (91.6±9.9 vs. 81.0±18.2, p=0.014). CONCLUSION These findings indicate that lateral UKA has superior short-term functional outcomes compared to TKA in patients with isolated lateral OA. Better outcomes were especially seen in younger patients and females. These findings may help orthopedic surgeons choose treatment for patients presenting with lateral OA and optimize treatment for individual patients.

Outcomes of cementless unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review

BACKGROUND Aseptic loosening is a common failure mode in cemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This led to the development of cementless designs but the historical outcomes were poor. Recent developments in cementless designs have improved outcomes, but the current status is unknown. Therefore, a systematic review was performed to assess recent outcomes of cementless knee arthroplasty. METHODS A search was performed using PubMed, Embase and Cochrane systems and national registries for studies reporting outcomes since 2005. Fifty-two cohort studies and four registries reported survivorship, failure modes or functional outcomes of cementless UKA and TKA. RESULTS Nine level I studies, six level II studies, three level III studies, 34 level IV studies and four registries were included. Three hundred eighteen failures in 10,309 cementless TKA procedures and 62 failures in 2218 cementless UKA procedures resulted in extrapolated five-year, 10-year and 15-year survivorship of cementless TKAs of 97.7%, 95.4% and 93.0%, respectively, and cementless UKA of 96.4%, 92.9% and 89.3%, respectively. Aseptic loosening was more common in cementless TKA (25%) when compared to UKA (13%). Functional outcomes of cementless TKA and UKA were excellent with 84.3% and 84.5% of the maximum possible scores, respectively. CONCLUSIONS This systematic review showed that good to excellent extrapolated survivorship and functional outcomes are seen following modern cementless UKA and TKA, with a low incidence of aseptic loosening following cementless UKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level IV.

Different optimal alignment but equivalent functional outcomes in medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION Several differences in kinematics, functional outcomes and alignment exist between medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Therefore, the purpose of this study was (1) to compare functional outcomes between both procedures with the hypothesis that both have equivalent outcomes and (2) to assess the role of preoperative and postoperative alignment on functional outcomes in both procedures. METHODS Patients who underwent UKA were included when overall function - using Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis (WOMAC) score - and joint awareness - using Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) - were available preoperatively and at minimum two-year follow-up. A total of 143 medial UKA and 36 lateral UKA patients reported outcomes at mean 2.4-years follow-up (range 2.0 to 5.0year). RESULTS Preoperatively and postoperatively, no differences were seen between medial and lateral UKA in overall function (89.8±11.7 vs. 90.2±12.4, respectively, p=0.855) and joint awareness (71.2±24.5 vs. 70.9±28.2, respectively, p=0.956). With neutral postoperative alignment (-1° to three degrees), less joint awareness was noted following medial UKA than lateral UKA (72.6±22.6 vs. 55.3±28.5, p=0.024). With undercorrection (three degrees to seven degrees), however, following lateral UKA less joint awareness (85.3±19.5 vs. 68.2±26.8, p=0.020) and better functional outcomes (96.0±5.4 vs. 88.5±11.6, p=0.001) were noted than medial UKA. CONCLUSION Equivalent functional outcomes were noted between medial and lateral UKA at short-term follow-up but different optimal alignment angles seem to exist for both procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level III therapeutic study.