Molfetta Luigi, Casabella Andrea, Palermo Augusto
DISC Department, Research Centre of Osteoporosis and Osteoarticular Disease, School of Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Unit of Orthopaedic Surgery, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Capitanio Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Feb 24;7:405. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2020.00405. eCollection 2020.
The patellar resurfacing is still a controversial and unresolved problem. The choice to use the patellar resurfacing in the total knee prosthesis (TKP) is decided by the surgeon's experience; he analyzes the thickness, the shape, consumption of the surface and he chooses the use of patellar resurfacing or to limit itself to cheiloplasty, denervation, or often to the release of the lateral wing ligament. He also assesses the metabolic state of the bone linked to Osteoporosis and the potential fragility of the joint and kneecap in particular. Bone loss after total knee arthroplasty (TKP) may lead to periprosthetic fractures that are associated with significant costs (morbidity, economic, etc.) and pose a challenge to operative fixation. The literature doesn't express a definitive judgment on the two options, since the results can be overlapped on average. Each option has advantages and disadvantages to be considered in the overall balance of the patellar operation. In reality, however, this technical choice requires more consolidated decision-making criteria so as to minimize the incidence of post-surgical femoral-patellar pain syndrome, the second cause of failure, which frequently leads to revision of the implant. The balance between experience and evidence can be a compromise in the choice of surgery. The experience documented in the literature must identify the parameters capable of constructing an algorithm aimed not only at the secondary resurfacing rate, but at the overall clinical evaluation. This has implications also for the rehabilitation of these patients after surgery.
髌骨表面置换仍然是一个有争议且未解决的问题。在全膝关节置换术(TKP)中是否选择进行髌骨表面置换,由外科医生的经验决定;他会分析髌骨的厚度、形状、表面磨损情况,然后选择进行髌骨表面置换,或者仅进行唇成形术、去神经支配术,或者常常进行外侧翼状韧带松解术。他还会评估与骨质疏松相关的骨骼代谢状态,以及关节尤其是髌骨的潜在脆弱性。全膝关节置换术后(TKP)的骨质流失可能导致假体周围骨折,这会带来巨大的成本(发病率、经济成本等),并给手术固定带来挑战。文献对于这两种选择并未给出明确的判断,因为平均而言结果可能会相互重叠。在髌骨手术的整体权衡中,每种选择都有其优缺点需要考虑。然而,实际上这种技术选择需要更可靠的决策标准,以尽量减少术后股骨 - 髌骨关节疼痛综合征的发生率,这是失败的第二大原因,经常导致植入物翻修。经验与证据之间的平衡可能是手术选择中的一种折衷。文献中记录的经验必须确定能够构建算法的参数,该算法不仅针对二次表面置换率,还针对整体临床评估。这对于这些患者术后的康复也有影响。