Early outcomes of patella resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: A report from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorClements, W.
dc.contributor.authorMiller, L.
dc.contributor.authorWhitehouse, S.
dc.contributor.authorGraves, S.
dc.contributor.authorRyan, P.
dc.contributor.authorCrawford, R.
dc.date.issued2010
dc.description.abstract<h4>Background</h4>Patella resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty is a contentious issue. The literature suggests that resurfacing of the patella is based on surgeon preference, and little is known about the role and timing of resurfacing and how this affects outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>We analyzed 134,799 total knee arthroplasties using data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Hazards ratios (HRs) were used to compare rates of early revision between patella resurfacing at the primary procedure (the resurfacing group, R) and primary arthroplasty without resurfacing (no-resurfacing group, NR). We also analyzed the outcomes of NR that were revised for isolated patella addition.<h4>Results</h4>At 5 years, the R group showed a lower revision rate than the NR group: cumulative per cent revision (CPR) 3.1% and 4.0%, respectively (HR = 0.75, p < 0.001). Revisions for patellofemoral pain were more common in the NR group (17%) than in the R group (1%), and "patella only" revisions were more common in the NR group (29%) than in the R group (6%). Non-resurfaced knees revised for isolated patella addition had a higher revision rate than patella resurfacing at the primary procedure, with a 4-year CPR of 15% and 2.8%, respectively (HR = 4.1, p < 0.001).<h4>Interpretation</h4>Rates of early revision of primary total knees were higher when the patella was not resurfaced, and suggest that surgeons may be inclined to resurface later if there is patellofemoral pain. However, 15% of non-resurfaced knees revised for patella addition are re-revised by 4 years. Our results suggest an early beneficial outcome for patella resurfacing at primary arthroplasty based on revision rates up to 5 years.
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityWarren J. Clements, Lisa Miller, Sarah L. Whitehouse, Stephen E. Graves, Philip Ryan, and Ross W. Crawford
dc.identifier.citationActa Orthopaedica, 2010; 81(1):108-113
dc.identifier.doi10.3109/17453670903413145
dc.identifier.issn1745-3674
dc.identifier.issn1745-3682
dc.identifier.orcidGraves, S. [0000-0002-1629-319X]
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/61216
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis
dc.rightsCopyright © 2010 Informa Plc. All rights reserved.
dc.source.urihttps://doi.org/10.3109/17453670903413145
dc.subjectPatella
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectOsteoarthritis, Knee
dc.subjectProsthesis Failure
dc.subjectTreatment Outcome
dc.subjectArthroplasty, Replacement, Knee
dc.subjectReoperation
dc.subjectRegistries
dc.subjectKnee Prosthesis
dc.subjectTime Factors
dc.subjectAustralia
dc.titleEarly outcomes of patella resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: A report from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.publication-statusPublished

Files

Collections

Public Health publications