The Knee
Volume 16, Issue 2 , Pages 92-97, March 2009

How to address the patella in revision total knee arthroplasty

Ranawat Orthopaedics, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 East 70th Street, 6th floor, New York, NY 10021, United States

Received 1 May 2008; received in revised form 10 August 2008; accepted 16 August 2008. published online 26 September 2008.

Abstract 

Patellar issues need to be carefully addressed during any revision TKA and the surgeon often faces the question of what to do with the patella at the time of revision. The choice of treatment is often made by balancing what is technically feasible with the risk of potential complications and takes into account the reason for the revision, the type of implant (i.e., metal-backing or all-polyethylene), the duration of implantation, the fixation, the stability, the sterilization technique, the wear, the presence of osteolysis, the compatibility with the femoral component, and most importantly the remaining bone stock. The various treatment options then include retention of the patellar component, revision of the patellar component, removal of the component with retention of the patellar bony shell (patelloplasty or resection arthroplasty), excision of the patella (partial or total patellectomy), secondary resurfacing, and reconstruction/augmentation of the patellar bone stock. Isolated patellar revision is associated with a high complication rate and recurrent failure when poor patellar tracking, incongruent designs and malalignment of the femoral and tibial components exist. Retention of a well-fixed all-PE (non-oxidized) patella is advocated where possible and revision of metal-backed patella is recommended (unless well fixed with poor bone stock). In the situation of a deficient patella, patelloplasty, augmentation procedures and very rarely patellectomy are other viable options.

Keywords: Revision total knee arthroplasty, Patellar options, Patellar component, Patellofemoral complications, Patellar complications, Failed patellar component

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Disclosures: Although no funding was received for this manuscript, the research foundation of one or more of the authors (ASR, CSR) has received funding from DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, (Warsaw, IN) and Stryker Orthopaedics, Inc. (Mahwah, NJ). One or more of the authors (ASR, CSR) have received royalties from DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, (Warsaw, IN) and Stryker Orthopaedics, Inc. (Mahwah, NJ). ASR is a consultant for DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, (Warsaw, IN) and Stryker Orthopaedics, Inc. (Mahwah, NJ). CSR is designer/consultant for DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, (Warsaw, IN) and Stryker Orthopaedics, Inc. (Mahwah, NJ).

PII: S0968-0160(08)00148-8

doi:10.1016/j.knee.2008.08.003

The Knee
Volume 16, Issue 2 , Pages 92-97, March 2009