J Knee Surg 2013; 26(05): 333-342
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1333904
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Differences between Midvastus and Subvastus TKA Surgical Approaches in the Tasks of Sitting and Standing

Sarah L. Jarvis
1   Department of Research, The CORE Institute, Sun City West, Arizona
,
Brian R. Onstot
2   Arizona College of Osteopathic Medicine, Midwestern University, Glendale, Arizona
,
Manoshi Bhowmik-Stoker
3   Department of Orthopaedics, Stryker, Mahwah, New Jersey
,
Marc C. Jacofsky
1   Department of Research, The CORE Institute, Sun City West, Arizona
,
David J. Jacofsky
4   Department of Research, The CORE Institute, Phoenix, Arizona
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

20 November 2012

13 December 2012

Publication Date:
13 February 2013 (online)

Preview

Abstract

The mini-midvastus (MV) approach to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) minimizes damage to the extensor mechanism; however, the mini-subvastus (SV) approach is designed to avoid such damage. Quadriceps weakness following TKA can have a significant impact on the activities of daily living, particularly stand-to-sit down (STSD) and sit-to-stand up (STSU) activities. Fifty-three subjects diagnosed with primary osteoarthritis and scheduled to undergo TKA were randomized to receive an MV or SV surgical approach and were given identical postoperative orders. Compared with age-matched controls, the SV group had a quicker return of normal peak knee extension moment during STSU, whereas the MV group had a quicker return of normal movement patterns in hip, knee, and ankle parameters during STSD yet represented the higher functioning subjects as more MV subjects had difficulty completing the task as instructed. Considering both movements are required for daily living, neither surgical group was found to have a significant advantage over the other in functional outcome through 6 months post-TKA.