Author:
Lechner Ricarda,Lazzeri Matteo,Oberaigner Wilhelm,Nardelli Paul,Roth Tobias,Köglberger Paul,Krismer Martin,Liebensteiner Michael Christian
Abstract
Abstract
Background
The aim of the study was to investigate the issue of medial midvastus (MMV) vs. medial parapatellar (MPP) approaches in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). It was hypothesized that the two surgical approaches would produce significantly different results with respect to patient-reported knee score outcome (hypothesis 1), short-term postoperative range of motion (ROM) (hypothesis 2), long-term postoperative ROM (hypothesis 3) and prosthesis survival (hypothesis 4).
Methods
A retrospective comparative study design was applied. Data sets were obtained from the state arthroplasty registry. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) data were analyzed from preoperative and 1 year postoperatively. The ROM data were analyzed for the time points preoperative, postoperative days 4 and 10 and 1 year.
Results
Available were 627 cases (407 MMV vs. 220 MPP) and 1 year postoperatively there were no significant differences between groups regarding the WOMAC scores (hypothesis 1). Early postoperatively on days 4 and 10 after TKA there were no differences between groups (p = 0.305 and p = 0.383, respectively, hypothesis 2). Likewise, ROM did not significantly differ between the groups 1 year after TKA (p = 0.338, hypothesis 3). The 5‑year prosthesis survival did not differ between the groups and showed 94.46% (95% confidence interval, CI 90.69–96.73%) in the MMV group and 94.33% (95% CI 89.96–96.83%) in the MPP group (p = 0.664, hypothesis 4).
Conclusion
Both surgical approaches produce equivalent clinical results in terms of early postoperative ROM, late postoperative ROM and 1‑year WOMAC. The same prosthesis survival rates can be expected.
Funder
University of Innsbruck and Medical University of Innsbruck
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
Reference25 articles.
1. Aslam MA, Sabir AB, Tiwari V et al (2017) Approach to total knee replacement: a randomized double blind study between medial parapatellar and midvastus approach in the early postoperative period in asian population. J Knee Surg 30:793–797
2. Bathis H, Perlick L, Blum C et al (2005) Midvastus approach in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, double-blinded study on early rehabilitation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 13:545–550
3. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH et al (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833–1840
4. Dalury DF, Jiranek WA (1999) A comparison of the midvastus and paramedian approaches for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 14:33–37
5. Dalury DF, Snow RG, Adams MJ (2008) Electromyographic evaluation of the midvastus approach. J Arthroplasty 23:136–140
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献