MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.arth.2025.09.046

Медицинская библиотека · The Journal of arthroplasty · 2025

A Prospective, Single-Center, Randomized Controlled Study Comparing Non-Resurfacing versus Resurfacing in a Cohort of 250 Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty With a Minimum Five-Year Follow-Up.

Catteeuw Antoine, Vermue Hannes, Lefeuvre Anaïs, Servien Elvire, Batailler Cécile, Lustig Sébastien

СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Despite extensive research, patellar management during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. We therefore asked the following: Is there a difference in clinical and radiological outcomes at a minimum 5-year follow-up with a modern posterior-stabilized TKA performed with or without patellar resurfacing (PR)?

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

This single-center prospective randomized trial included 250 knees (245 patients) undergoing primary TKA between April 2017 and November 2018. Exclusion criteria were isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis, constrained TKA, and preoperative flexion less than 90°. Patients were randomized into PR or patellar nonresurfacing (PNR) groups, receiving the same posterior-stabilized "patella-friendly" prosthesis. Clinical evaluation at 5-year follow-up included the Knee Society Score (KSS), Forgotten Joint Score, Kujala and Lille scores for anterior knee pain, and range of motion. Radiographic assessment evaluated patellofemoral osteoarthritis progression and patellar implant loosening. Complications and surgical revisions were recorded.

RESULTS

There were 213 knees (109 in PR, 104 in PNR) available with a 5-year follow-up (9% lost to follow-up and 4% deceased). Clinical outcomes showed no significant differences between groups (KSS knee: P = 0.10; KSS function: P = 0.19; Forgotten Joint Score: P = 0.24; Kujala: P = 0.36; Lille: P = 0.43). There were five patients (4.5%) in PNR who required secondary PR, whereas two patients (1.8%) in PR required revision of the patellar button. The revision rate for patellofemoral causes was 3.8%, without significant difference between groups (P = 0.16). At 60 months, implant survival was similar between PR and PNR (93.6 and 91.8%; P = 0.96).

CONCLUSION

This large prospective randomized study found no clinical advantage of routine PR at 5-year follow-up. While resurfacing may reduce anterior knee pain, it also introduces risks such as fracture and maltracking. In the context of patella-friendly posterior-stabilized implants, these findings support a more selective approach, which should be guided by objective criteria.

Для цитирования: Catteeuw Antoine, Vermue Hannes, Lefeuvre Anaïs, Servien Elvire, Batailler Cécile, Lustig Sébastien. A Prospective, Single-Center, Randomized Controlled Study Comparing Non-Resurfacing versus Resurfacing in a Cohort of 250 Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty With a Minimum Five-Year Follow-Up.. The Journal of arthroplasty. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2025.09.046.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.