» Articles » PMID: 10220181

Patellofemoral Complications with the Insall-Burstein II Posterior-stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty

Overview
Journal J Arthroplasty
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 1999 Apr 29
PMID 10220181
Citations 18
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The Insall-Burstein and Insall-Burstein II posterior-stabilized (I-B II PS) prostheses have been reported to have a high prevalence of patellar complications. This is a prospective, consecutive study of 118 primary total knee arthroplasties in 82 patients with the I-B II PS prosthesis implanted by 1 surgeon, using a specific technique for patellar resurfacing. The mean follow-up time was 4.0 years (range, 2-8 years). Clinical evaluation was performed using a standard knee score system with specific additional evaluation of the patellofemoral joint. Radiographs were evaluated for fracture, loosening, and subluxation. Ninety-four knees (80%) were rated excellent, 21 knees (17%) good, and 3 knees (3%) fair. The mean flexion was 112 degrees postoperative. No knee required reoperation for the patellofemoral joint. There were 2 nondisplaced and 1 minimally displaced patellar fractures treated nonoperatively, no patellar clunk syndrome, and no subluxations. Using the patellar evaluation system, 109 knees had no anterior knee pain, 7 knees had mild pain, and 2 knees (1 patient) had moderate-to-severe pain only with rising from a chair. Patellofemoral crepitus with active flexion-extension in the seated position was noted in 16 knees (14%) but was painful in only 2 knees (1 patient). With this technique for patellar resurfacing with this prosthesis, patellofemoral complications were only 4.2%, and no knee required reoperation for the patella or for loosening. With attention to operative technique, patellofemoral resurfacing with this posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty can be highly successful.

Citing Articles

Radiological and clinical outcomes after Attune primary total knee arthroplasty using Stemmable Tibia: A two-year follow-up prospective bi-center study.

Rhee S, Woo S, Kim J, Yun M, Park C, Lee S PLoS One. 2024; 19(8):e0309015.

PMID: 39208149 PMC: 11361569. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0309015.


Does design change in total knee arthroplasty implants affect patient-reported outcomes?.

Toossi N, Bucklen B, Meding L, Meding J BMC Surg. 2023; 23(1):49.

PMID: 36882774 PMC: 9993584. DOI: 10.1186/s12893-023-01948-1.


Patella Strength Characteristics in Cemented vs Press-fit Implants: A Biomechanical Analysis of Initial Stability.

Patel A, Wilder J, Weldy J, Ross B, Kim N, Wang H Arthroplast Today. 2022; 14:140-147.

PMID: 35308050 PMC: 8927789. DOI: 10.1016/j.artd.2022.02.012.


Comparison between Patellar Resurfacing and Retention in Total Knee Arthroplasty Regarding the Postoperative Satisfaction of Patients and Patellar Crepitus.

Kaseb M, Mortazavi J, Ayati Firoozabadi M, Toofan H Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2019; 7(5):441-444.

PMID: 31742221 PMC: 6802549.


A variant of patellar clunk syndrome after bilateral total knee arthroplasty: clinical manifestations and arthroscopic images.

Teo E, Ang C, Sathappan S Orthop Surg. 2014; 6(4):326-8.

PMID: 25430718 PMC: 6583227. DOI: 10.1111/os.12142.