266 / 460
Comparative Results of TKA and PFA for Isolated Patellofemoral Osteoarthritis
265
patients were significant older than the PFA
patients (mean, 69 vs 60 yeas, respectively), a
well powered regression analysis demonstrated
that age was an independent variable had no
effect on postoperative KSS score, KSS
function score, Tegner score, UCLA score, or
satisfaction at final follow-up. It should be
emphasized that strict radiographic criteria
were utilized in our study in order to include
only patients with isolated patellofemoral
arthritis. Although it is possible that with longer
follow-up we will see deterioration of results in
the group treated with patellofemoral arthritis,
the early benefits of improved function, return
to higher activity, and less morbidity seemed to
outweigh the risk of revision for tibiofemoral
arthritis progression.
Conclusions
In our study patients who underwent modern
PFA for treatment of isolated patellofemoral
arthritis were compared with a cohort who
underwent total knee arthroplasty for the same
diagnosis during the same time period. Patients
treated with PFA demonstrated similar results
with respect to pain relief, but showed improved
function and return to activity when compared
with the patients treated with TKA. PFApatients
also experienced less blood loss, fewer
complications, and shorter hospital stay
following surgery. Our results indicate that PFA
is a less invasive treatment option for patients
with isolated patellofemoral arthritis, yielding
early outcomes that compare favorably to TKA.
Literature
[1] Federico DJ, Reider B. Results of isolated patellar
debridement for patellofemoral pain in patients with normal
patellar alignment.
Am J Sports Med 1997; 25(5): 663-9.
[2] Fulkerson JP. Alternatives to patellofemoral
arthroplasty.
Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005;(436): 76-80.
[3] Maquet P. Advancement of the tibial tubercle
. Clin
Orthop Relat Res 1976;(115): 225-30.
[4] Ackroyd CE, Polyzoides AJ. Patellectomy for
osteoarthritis. A study of eighty-one patients followed from 2
to 22 years.
J Bone Joint Surg 1978; 60B(3): 353-7.
[5] Arciero RA, Toomey HE. Patellofemoral
arthroplasty: A 3-9 year follow-up study.
Clin Orthop Relat
Res 1988; (236): 60-71.
[6] Laskin RS, van Steijn M. Total knee replacement
for patients with patellofemoral arthritis.
Clin Orthop Relat
Res 1999; 3670: 89-95.
[7] Meding JB, Wing JT, Keating EM, Ritter MA.
Total knee arthroplasty for isolated patellofemoral arthritis in
younger patients.
Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007; (46): 78-82.
[8] Mont MA, Haas S, Mullick T, Hungerford
DS. Total knee arthroplasty for patellofemoral arthritis.
J Bone Joint Surg 2002; 84A(11): 1977-81.
[9] Parvizi J, Stuart MJ, Pagnano MW, Hanssen
AD. Total knee arthroplasty in patients with isolated patello
femoral arthritis.
Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;(392): 147-52.
[10] Lonner JH. Patellofemoral arthroplasty: pros, cons,
and design considerations.
ClinOrthop Relat Res 2004;(428):
158-65.
[11] Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological
assessment of osteo-arthrosis.
Ann Rheum Dis 1957;16(4):
494-502.
[12] Iwano T, Kurosawa H, Tokuyama H,
HoshikawaY. Roentgenographic and clinical findings of
patellofemoral osteoarthrosis. With special reference to its
relationship to femorotibial osteoarthrosis and etiologic
factors.
Clin Orthop Relat Res 1990;(252): 190-7.
[13] Tecklenburg K, Dejour D, Hoser C, Fink C.
Bony and cartilaginous anatomy of the patellofemoral joint.
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2006; 14(3): 235-40.
[14] Insall J, Salvati E. Patella position in the normal
knee joint.
Radiology 1971;101(1): 101-4.
[15] Merchant AC. Early results with a total
patelloefmoral joint replacement arthroplasty prosthesis.
J Arthroplasty 2004; 19(7): 829-36.