3% in the R group while 13 6% in the NR group Incidence of post

3% in the R group while 13.6% in the NR group. Incidence of post op PF clunk in the R group was 10.4% while it was only 1.3% in the NR. ( statistically significant p<0.005 compared to R group) Incidence of post crepitus in the R group TKI-258 was 13.5% while it was 17% in the NR. The incidence of post PF pain was lowest ( only 2.7% ) in the patients who had patelloplasty in the NR Group. ( statistically significant p<0.005 compared to the other members of the NR group ) The incidence of post PF clunk was lowest ( 0% ) in the patients who had patelloplasty in the NR Group. ( statistically significant p<0.005 compared to the other members of the NR group ) The incidence of post PF crepitus was lowest (only 2.7% ) in the patients who had patelloplasty in the NR Group. ( statistically significant p<0.

005 compared to the other members of the NR group). (Table 1) Table 1 Patients with pre-op patellofemoral pain. 77 patients (10.1%) had no pre op PF pain Out of 77 patients, 54 had resurfacing while 23 did not have resurfacing. Incidence of post op PF pain was 8.5% in the R group while 8.3% in the NR. Incidence of post op PF clunk in the R group was 12.7% while it was only 8.3% in the NR. Incidence of post crepitus in the R group was 14.8% while it was 8.3% in the NR. ( statistically significant p<0.005 compared to the R group ) The incidence of post PF pain was lowest ( 0% ) in the patients who had patelloplasty in the NR Group. ( statistically significant p<0.005 compared to the other members of the NR group ) The incidence of post PF clunk was lowest ( 0% ) in the patients who had patelloplasty in the NR Group.

( statistically significant p<0.005 compared to the other members of the NR group ) The incidence of post PF crepitus was lowest ( 0% ) in the patients who had patelloplasty in the NR Group. ( statistically significant p<0.005 compared to the other members of the NR group ). (Table 2) Table 2 Patients without Pre op patellofemoral pain. DISCUSSION The optimal treatment of patella during total knee replacement is unclear. After initial enthusiasm of resurfacing, complications appeared including wear of the patellar polyethylene, loosening of the patellar component, patellar fracture, and rupture of the patellar tendon which led to difficult surgical revisions and uncertain results.9,10 These problems were considered so important that some authors decided to conduct studies that kept the patella non-resurfaced.

11-13 Investigators of these non comparative studies concluded that in specific conditions it was advisable to leave the patella non-resurfaced. Picetti et al.12 and Sodry et al.13 considered the non-resurfacing for patients with osteoarthritis with good cartilage on the patella and who were young active and non-obese. Kim et al.14 proposed this option Brefeldin_A for knees with the same characteristics but that also had a congruent patellofemoral tracking, a normal anatomic patella shape, and no evidence of crystalline disease or inflammatory synovitis.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>