Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2017; 30(02): 174-178
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1584192
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Outcome of Total Knee Replacement via Two Approaches in Indian Scenario

Rajeev Shukla
1   Department of Orthopedics, Sri Aurobindo Medical College and PG Institute, Indore, India
,
Pranav Mahajan
1   Department of Orthopedics, Sri Aurobindo Medical College and PG Institute, Indore, India
,
Manjeet Singh
1   Department of Orthopedics, Sri Aurobindo Medical College and PG Institute, Indore, India
,
Ravi Kant Jain
1   Department of Orthopedics, Sri Aurobindo Medical College and PG Institute, Indore, India
,
Ravindra Kumar
2   Sri Aurobindo Medical College and PG Institute, Central Research Laboratory, Indore, India
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

19 May 2015

28 March 2016

Publication Date:
23 May 2016 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This study was designed to assess the early and late clinical and functional outcome based on Knee Society Score in patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR) by medial parapatellar approach/midvastus approach. A total of 52 patients were included in the study of whom 28 patients were operated by medial parapatellar approach and 24 by midvastus approach. Patients were assessed on the basis of Knee Society Score, along with other parameters such as duration of hospital stay, blood loss during, and after surgery. The patients were followed up at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. The knee objective score showed significant better scores in midvastus group at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months, but the score in both the groups was not significant at 6 months and 1 year. The knee functional score showed significant better score in midvastus group at the end of 2 and 6 weeks. However, score in both the groups was not significant by the end of 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. Patients' satisfaction and expectation scores were similar in both groups at all time intervals. The functional outcome of TKR surgery by midvastus approach was better in the first 3 months in comparison to medial parapatellar approach.

Keywords

total knee replacement - medial parapatellar - midvastus - knee society score
 

  • References

  • 1 Vail TP, Lang JE. Insall and Scott Surgery of the Knee. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Churchill Livingstone, Elsevier; 2006: 1455-1521
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Insall J, Ranawat CS, Scott WN, Walker P. Total condylar knee replacement: preliminary report. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1976; (120) 149-154
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kim RH, Scott WN. Operative Techniques: Total Knee Replacement. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders-Elsevier; 2009: 91-103
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bijlsma JW, Berenbaum F, Lafeber FP. Osteoarthritis: an update with relevance for clinical practice. Lancet 2011; 377 (9783): 2115-2126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989; (248) 13-14
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Scuderi GR, Bourne RB, Noble PC, Benjamin JB, Lonner JH, Scott WN. The new Knee Society Knee Scoring System. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (1) 3-19
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dennis DA, Komistek RD, Stiehl JB, Walker SA, Dennis KN. Range of motion after total knee arthroplasty: the effect of implant design and weight-bearing conditions. J Arthroplasty 1998; 13 (7) 748-752
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Scuderi GR, Tenholder M, Capeci C. Surgical approaches in mini-incision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; (428) 61-67
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bonutti PM, Zywiel MG, Ulrich SD, Stroh DA, Seyler TM, Mont MA. A comparison of subvastus and midvastus approaches in minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92 (3) 575-582
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Dalury DF, Jiranek WA. A comparison of the midvastus and paramedian approaches for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1999; 14 (1) 33-37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 White Jr RE, Allman JK, Trauger JA, Dales BH. Clinical comparison of the midvastus and medial parapatellar surgical approaches. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1999; (367) 117-122
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Boerger TO, Aglietti P, Mondanelli N, Sensi L. Mini-subvastus versus medial parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; 440: 82-87
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 van Hemert WL, Senden R, Grimm B, van der Linde MJ, Lataster A, Heyligers IC. Early functional outcome after subvastus or parapatellar approach in knee arthroplasty is comparable. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011; 19 (6) 943-951
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Callaghan JJ, O'Rourke MR, Liu SS. Blood management: issues and options. J Arthroplasty 2005; 20 (4) (Suppl. 02) 51-54
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Roysam GS, Oakley MJ. Subvastus approach for total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, and observer-blinded trial. J Arthroplasty 2001; 16 (4) 454-457
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Cameron B, Galatz L, Williams Jr GR. Factors affecting the outcome of total shoulder arthroplasty. Am J Orthop 2001; 30 (8) 613-623
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Schroer WC, Diesfeld PJ, Reedy ME, LeMarr AR. Mini-subvastus approach for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2008; 23 (1) 19-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Aglietti P, Baldini A, Sensi L. Quadriceps-sparing versus mini-subvastus approach in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 452: 106-111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 McAllister CM, Stepanian JD. The impact of minimally invasive surgical techniques on early range of motion after primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2008; 23 (1) 10-18
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Li XG, Tang TS, Qian ZL, Huang LX, Pan WM, Zhu RF. Comparison of the mini-midvastus with the mini-medial parapatellar approach in primary TKA. Orthopedics 2010; 33 (10) 723
    PubMedGoogle Scholar