The Library

The Warwick patellofemoral arthroplasty trial : a randomised clinical trial of total knee arthroplasty versus patellofemoral arthroplasty in patients with severe arthritis of the patellofemoral joint

Tools

Odumenya, M. (Michelle), McGuinness, Katie, Achten, Juul, Parsons, Nicholas R., Spalding, Tim and Costa, Matthew L.. (2011) The Warwick patellofemoral arthroplasty trial : a randomised clinical trial of total knee arthroplasty versus patellofemoral arthroplasty in patients with severe arthritis of the patellofemoral joint. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, Vol.12 (No.1). p. 265. ISSN 1471-2474

Preview

PDF
WRAP_Odumenya_1471-2474-12-265.pdf - Published Version - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (325Kb)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-12-265

Abstract

Background
Severe arthritis of the knee is a disabling condition, with over 50,000 knee replacements performed each year in the UK. Isolated patellofemoral joint arthritis occurs in over 10% of these patients with the treatment options being patellofemoral arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty. Whilst many surgeons believe total knee arthroplasty is the 'gold standard' treatment for severe knee arthritis, patellofemoral arthroplasty has certain potential advantages. Primarily, because this operation allows the patient to keep the majority of their own knee joint; preserving bone-stock and the patients' own ligaments. Patellofemoral arthroplasty has also been recognised as a less 'invasive' operation than primary total knee arthroplasty, facilitating a more rapid recovery. There are currently no published results of randomised clinical trials comparing the two arthroplasty techniques. The primary objective of the current study is to assess whether there is a difference in functional knee scores and quality of life outcome assessments at one year post-operation between patellofemoral arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty. The secondary objective is to assess the complication rates for both procedures.

Methods/design
Patients who are deemed suitable, by an Orthopaedic Consultant, for patellofemoral arthroplasty and medically fit for surgery are eligible to take part in this trial. The consenting patients will be randomised in a 1:1 allocation to a total knee or patellofemoral arthroplasty. The randomisation sequence will be computer generated and administered by a central independent randomisation service. Following consent, all participants will have their knee function, quality of life and physical activity level assessed through questionnaires. The assigned surgery will then be performed using the preferred technique and implant of the operating surgeon. The first post-operative assessments will take place at six weeks, followed by further assessments at 3, 6 and 12 months. At each assessment time point all complications will be recorded. In addition, community and social care services usage will be collected using a patient questionnaire at 3, 6 & 12 months. The patients will then be sent an annual postal questionnaire. The questionnaire will ask about any problems, knee pain and function following their knee arthroplasty to monitor long-term function and failure rates.

Discussion
This trial is expected to deliver results in early 2013.

Item Type:

Journal Article

Subjects:

R Medicine > RD Surgery

Divisions:

Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School
Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences > Clinical Trials Unit

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):

Patellofemoral joint -- Surgery, Arthroplasty, Total knee replacement, Arthritis -- Treatment

Journal or Publication Title:

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Publisher:

Bio Med Central

ISSN:

1471-2474

Official Date:

23 November 2011

Dates:

Date	Event
23 November 2011	Published

Volume:

Vol.12

Number:

No.1

Page Range:

p. 265

Identification Number:

10.1186/1471-2474-12-265

Status:

Peer Reviewed

Publication Status:

Published

Access rights to Published version:

Open Access

Funder:

Action Medical Research (AMR)

References:

1. Davies AP, Vince AS, Shepstone L, Donell ST, Glasgow MM: The radiologic
prevalence of patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002,
402:206-212.
2. Ackroyd CE: Development and early results of a new patellofemoral
arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005, 436:7-13.
3. Arciero RA, Toomey HE: Patellofemoral arthroplasty. 3-year to 9-year
follow-up study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988, 236:60-71.
4. Leadbetter WB, Ragland PS, Mont MA: The appropriate use of
patellofemoral arthroplasty - An analysis of reported indications,
contraindications, and failures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005, 436:91-99.
5. Cartier P, Sanouiller JL, Khefacha A: Long-term results with the first
patellotemoral prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005, 436:47-54.
6. Kooijman HJ, Driessen A, van Horn JR: Long-term results of patellofemoral
arthroplasty - A report of 56 arthroplasties with 17 years of follow-up. J
Bone Joint Surg Br 2003, 85(6):836-840.
7. Odumenya M, Costa ML, Parsons N, Achten J, Dhillon M, Krikler SJ: The
Avon patellofemoral joint replacement FIVE-YEAR RESULTS FROM AN
INDEPENDENT CENTRE. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010, 92(1):56-60.
8. Starks I, Roberts S, White SH: The Avon patellofemoral joint replacement
INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF EARLY FUNCTIONAL OUTCOMES. J Bone
Joint Surg Br 2009, 91(12):1579-1582.
9. Ishii Y, Matsuda Y, Sakata S, Onda N, Omori G: Primary total knee
arthroplasty using the Genesis I total knee prosthesis: a 5- to 10-year
follow-up study. Knee 2005, 12(5):341-345.
10. Mont MA, Haas S, Mullick T, Hungerford DS: Total knee arthroplasty for
patellofemoral arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002, 84(11):1977-1981.
11. Laskin RS, van Steijn M: Total knee replacement for patients with
patellofemoral arthritis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1999, , 367: 89-95.
12. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW: 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 1988,
15(12):1833-1840.
13. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A: Questionnaire on the
perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg
Br 1998, 80(1):63-69.
14. Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN: Rationale of the knee society
clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989, 248:13-14.
15. The EuroQol Group: EuroQol- a new facility for the measurement of
health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990, 16(3):199-208.
16. Salén BA, Spangfort EV, Nygren L, Nordemar R: The disability rating index:
an instrument for the assessment of disability in the clinical settings. J
Clin Epidemiol 1994, 47:1423-1434.
17. Zahiri CA, Schmalzried TP, Szuszczewicz ES, Amstutz HC: Assessing activity
in joint replacement patients. J Arthroplasty 1998, 13:890-895.
18. Bellamy N: Outcome measurement in osteoarthritis clinical trials. J
Rheumatol 1995, 22(Suppl 43):49-51.
19. Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G: Smallest detectable and minimal
clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their
implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF-36 quality
of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the
lower extremities. Arthritis Rheum 2001, 45(4):384-391.
20. Rooks DS, Huang J, Bierbaum BE, Bolus SA, Rubano J, Connolly CE, Alpert S,
Iversen MD, Katz JN: Effect of preoperative exercise on measures of
functional status in men and women under going total hip and knee
arthroplasty. Arthritis Rheum 2006, 55(5):700-708.