Stiff Total Knee Arthroplasty Research Articles

Arthroscopic Lysis of Adhesions for the Stiff Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Arthroscopic lysis of adhesions is a treatment option for patients with painful, stiff knees as a result of arthrofibrosis following knee arthroplasty, in whom prior manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) has failed. Typically, nonoperative treatment in these patients has also failed, including aggressive physiotherapy, stretching, dynamic splinting, and various pain-management measures or medications. Range of motion in these patients is often suboptimal, and any gains in flexibility will likely have hit a plateau over many months. The goal of performing lysis of adhesions is to increase the range of motion in patients with knee stiffness following total knee arthroplasty, as well as to reduce pain and restore physiologic function of the knee, enabling activities of daily living. This is a straightforward surgical technique that can be performed in a single stage. The preoperative range of motion is documented after induction of general anesthesia. The procedure begins with the establishment of standard medial and lateral parapatellar arthroscopic portals. A blunt trocar is introduced into the knee, and blunt, manual lysis of adhesions is performed in the suprapatellar pouch and the medial and lateral gutters with use of a sweeping motion after piercing and perforating the scarred adhesive bands or capsular tissue. Next, the arthroscope is inserted into the knee, and a diagnostic arthroscopy is performed. Bands of fibrous tissue are released and resected with use of electrocautery and a 4.0-mm arthroscopic shaver. Next, the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) is visualized in full flexion. If PCL tightness is observed, the PCL can be released from its femoral origin until the flexion gap is increased. This portion of the procedure can include either partial or full release of the PCL, as indicated. Next, the arthroscope is removed and the ipsilateral hip is flexed to 90° for a standard MUA. Gentle force is applied to the proximal aspect of the tibia, and the knee is flexed. After completing the MUA, immediate post-intervention range of motion of the knee is documented, and the patient is provided with a continuous passive motion (CPM) machine set to the maximum flexion and extension achieved in the operating room. Nonoperative treatment of a stiff knee following total knee arthroplasty is well documented in the current literature. Range of motion has been shown to increase in patients undergoing proper pain management, aggressive physical therapy, and closed MUA in the acute postoperative setting. Additionally, more severe cases of established arthrofibrosis despite prior MUA can be treated with an open lysis of adhesions1-3. Arthroscopic lysis of adhesions with PCL release versus resection has been well described previously. This procedure has been shown to benefit patients in whom initial nonoperative treatment has failed. Additionally, this procedure is not limited to the immediate acute postoperative period like standard MUA3. To our knowledge, no technique video has been published outlining arthroscopic lysis of adhesions for a stiff knee following total knee arthroplasty. This procedure has been shown to provide an immediate and lasting improvement in the flexion and extension arc of the knee, as well as improved functional outcomes. Patients should be educated that improvements gained in the operating room must be sustained through physical therapy. In a study of 32 patients who underwent arthroscopic lysis of adhesions for moderately severe arthrofibrosis following a total knee arthroplasty, Jerosch and Aldawoudy reported a mean postoperative flexion of 119° in the operating room and 97° at the time of the latest follow-up. Eight patients with extensor lag showed improvement from 27° to 4°. Average Knee Society scores improved from 70 points preoperatively to 86 points at the time of the latest follow-up4. Their article showed that arthroscopic treatment of stiffness following total knee arthroplasty is a safe and effective form of treatment. Perform manual lysis of adhesions with a trocar prior to inserting the arthroscope in order to improve visualization and access.Utilize all portals and accessory portals interchangeably in order to improve access.Prescribe physical therapy with or without CPM machine immediately following surgery in order to maintain correction.Utilize pump inflow in order to help distend the tightened capsule.Protect the prosthetic surface from scratches during portal establishment.Loss of flexion implies scarring in the suprapatellar pouch and/or intercondylar notch, or PCL tightness.Loss of extension implies a tight posterior capsule, posterior osteophytes, or scarring of the PCL stump.A motorized shaver is the best tool for treatment of dense fibrous tissue, but be sure not to scratch metal total knee components. TKA = total knee arthroplastyROM = range of motionCT = computed tomographyMRI = magnetic resonance imagingESR = erythrocyte sedimentation rateCRP = C-reactive protein.

The Cost of Stiffness After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundStiffness after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is debilitating and poorly understood. A heterogenous approach to the treatment is often utilized, including both nonoperative and operative treatment modalities. The purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence of treatments used between stiff and non-stiff TKA groups and their financial impact. MethodsAn observational cohort study was conducted using a large database. A total of 12,942 patients who underwent unilateral primary TKA from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2017, were included. Stiffness after TKA was defined as manipulation under anesthesia and a diagnosis code of stiffness or ankylosis, and subsequent diagnosis and procedure codes were used to identify the prevalence and financial impact of multiple common treatment options. ResultsThe prevalence of stiffness after TKA was 6.1%. Stiff patients were more likely to undergo physical therapy, medication, bracing, alternative treatment, clinic visits, and reoperation. Revision surgery was the most common reoperation in the stiff TKA group (7.6%). The incidence of both arthroscopy and revision surgery were higher in the stiff TKA population. Dual component revisions were costlier for patients who had stiff TKAs ($65,771 versus $48,287; P < .05). On average, patients who had stiffness after TKA endured costs from 1.5 to 7.5 times higher than the cost of their non-stiff counterparts during the 2 years following index TKA. ConclusionPatients who have stiffness after primary TKA face significantly higher treatment costs for both operative and nonoperative treatments than patients who do not have stiffness.

Lymphocyte Subset Ratio Cannot Diagnose Immune Failure of a TKA

BackgroundUp to 20% of patients are dissatisfied following total knee arthroplasty (TKA), most often due to pain and/or stiffness. The differential diagnosis includes immune reaction to the prosthesis. However, there is no consensus on diagnostic criteria for immune failure, an allergic reaction, to a TKA.Histologic evaluation could provide evidence as to whether an allergic reaction caused TKA failure. A recent study showed an increase in CD4+ lymphocytes compared to CD8+ lymphocytes in patients lymphocyte transformation testing (LTT) + for Ni. This finding is consistent with Ni sensitization, but can lymphocyte subsets be used to diagnose immune failure on a case-by-case basis? MethodsPeriprosthetic tissues from 18 revision cases of well-fixed, aseptic, but painful and/or stiff primary TKAs were analyzed. Six patients LTT− for Ni were matched as a cohort for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI), to 12 patients LTT + for Ni. Periprosthetic tissue biopsies underwent immunohistochemical IHC staining for CD4+ and CD8+ lymphocyte subsets and were compared by LTT status. The immunohistochemicalIHC results were also compared with periprosthetic histology. ResultsThere was no relationship between LTT status and mean CD4+ cells/hpf or CD4+:CD8+ lymphocyte ratio. No relationship was found between LTT stimulation index (continuous or categorical) and CD4+:CD8+ ratio or aseptic lymphocyte-dominant vasculitis-associated lesion ALVAL score. ConclusionLymphocytes in periprosthetic tissue are highly variable in number, subtype ratio, and location, and have no relationship to LTT result or ALVAL score on a case-by-case basis. Based on these results, lymphocyte subsets cannot diagnose immune failure. Further work is needed to determine criteria for the diagnosis of immune failure of a TKA.

Periprosthetic Tissue Reaction Independent of LTT Result and Implanted Materials in Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundAn allergic reaction may rarely cause a painful or stiff total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, no consensus diagnostic criteria for TKA immune failure exist. Lymphocyte transformation testing (LTT) measures immune sensitivity to various materials, but its role in diagnosing an allergic reaction to a TKA has not been established. This study compares TKA periprosthetic tissues in a) LTT-positive versus -negative patients and b) patients with conventional CoCrNi versus hypoallergenic implants. MethodsPeriprosthetic tissues from 26 revision cases of well-fixed, aseptic, but painful or stiff TKAs were analyzed. Twelve patients LTT positive for nickel (Ni) were matched as a cohort to 6 LTT-negative patients. In 4 patients LTT positive for Ni, tissue from first revision of CoCrNi implants was compared with tissue from subsequent revision of hypoallergenic implants. Histology was evaluated using the aseptic lymphocyte-dominated vasculitis-associated lesion (ALVAL) score. ResultsNo correlation was found between LTT and any ALVAL score component. The mean total ALVAL score was 3.8 ± 1.5 for LTT-negative patients and 3.3 ± 1.2 for LTT-positive patients (P = .44). The mean total ALVAL score at revision of CoCrNi implants was 3.0 ± 1.8 compared with 5.8 ± 0.5 at rerevision of hypoallergenic implants (P = .053). ConclusionPeriprosthetic TKA tissue reactions were indistinguishable between LTT-positive and -negative patients. LTT does not predict the periprosthetic tissue response. ALVAL scores of hypoallergenic revision implant tissue trended higher than primary CoCrNi implant tissue. A positive LTT may not indicate that a periprosthetic immune reaction is the cause of pain and stiffness after TKA. Level of Evidence3, retrospective cohort study.

Quantification of intra-articular fibrosis in patients with stiff knee arthroplasties using metal-reduction MRI.

AimsStiffness is a common complication after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Pathogenesis is not understood, treatment options are limited, and diagnosis is challenging. The aim of this study was to investigate if MRI can be used to visualize intra-articular scarring in patients with stiff, painful knee arthroplasties.MethodsWell-functioning primary TKAs (n = 11), failed non-fibrotic TKAs (n = 5), and patients with a clinical diagnosis of fibrosis1 (n = 8) underwent an MRI scan with advanced metal suppression (Slice Encoding for Metal Artefact Correction, SEMAC) with gadolinium contrast. Fibrotic tissue (low intensity on T1 and T2, low-moderate post-contrast enhancement) was quantified (presence and tissue thickness) in six compartments: supra/infrapatella, medial/lateral gutters, and posterior medial/lateral.ResultsFibrotic tissue was identified in all patients studied. However, tissue was significantly thicker in fibrotic patients (4.4 mm ± 0.2 mm) versus non-fibrotic (2.5 mm ± 0.4 mm) and normal TKAs (1.9 mm ± 0.2 mm, p = < 0.05). Significant (> 4 mm thick) tissue was seen in 26/48 (54%) of compartments examined in the fibrotic group, compared with 17/30 (57%) non-fibrotic, and 10/66 (15%) normal TKAs. Although revision surgery did improve range of movement (ROM) in all fibrotic patients, clinically significant restriction remained post-surgery.ConclusionStiff TKAs contain intra-articular fibrotic tissue that is identifiable by MRI. Studies should evaluate whether MRI is useful for surgical planning of debridement, and as a non-invasive measurement tool following interventions for stiffness caused by fibrosis. Revision for stiffness can improve ROM, but outcomes are sub-optimal and new treatments are required.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(10):1331–1340.

Outcome of Revision Surgery for the Idiopathic Stiff Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundIdiopathic stiff total knee arthroplasty (TKA) represents one of the most challenging subsets of the stiff TKA, as the etiology is unknown and there is no consensus on the most appropriate surgical treatment modality. Therefore, the aim of this study is to report on postoperative outcomes of revision surgery for idiopathic stiff TKA. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 189 consecutive patients (202 knees) who underwent revision TKA for stiffness: (1) 101 knees in the idiopathic stiffness cohort and (2) 88 in the non-idiopathic stiffness cohort. In the idiopathic stiffness cohort, 42 knees underwent isolated tibial insert exchange and 59 knees underwent component revision. Perioperative knee range of movement and complications were analyzed. ResultsThe overall revision surgery outcomes of the idiopathic stiffness cohort were worse than those of the non-idiopathic stiffness cohort with regard to maximum flexion (91.7° vs 100.1°, P = .02) and flexion range of motion (ROM) (87.6° vs 97.1°, P = .01). In the idiopathic stiffness cohort, isolated tibial insert exchange demonstrated greater maximum flexion (96.8° vs 88.4°, P = .06) and flexion ROM (93.2° vs 83.9°, P = .07). In terms of re-revision rates, the isolated tibial insert exchange idiopathic stiffness cohort demonstrated lower re-revision rates compared to the component revision idiopathic stiffness cohort (16.7% vs 31.0%, P = .01). ConclusionThis study demonstrates that the overall revision surgery outcome of idiopathic stiff TKA is worse than non-idiopathic TKA stiffness. In idiopathic stiffness cohorts, isolated tibial insert exchange was associated with lower re-revision rates than component revision, with similar efficacy in improving ROM, suggesting that isolated tibial insert exchange may be a preferred surgical treatment option in TKA patients with idiopathic stiffness.

The stiff total knee arthroplasty: causes, treatment modalities and results.

It is clear that the stiff total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a multifactorial entity associated with preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative factors.Management of the stiff TKA is best achieved by preventing its occurrence using strategies to control preoperative factors, avoid intraoperative technical errors and perform aggressive, painless postoperative physical medicine and rehabilitation; adequate pain control is paramount in non-invasive management.Careful attention to surgical exposure, restoring gap balance, minimizing surgical trauma to the patellar ligament/extensor mechanism, appropriate implant selection, pain control and adequate physical medicine and rehabilitation (physiotherapy, Astym therapy) all serve to reduce its incidence.For established stiff TKA, there are multiple treatment options available including mobilization under anaesthesia (MUA), arthroscopic arthrolysis, revision TKA, and combined procedures.Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:602-610. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180105

Improved clinical outcomes after revision arthroplasty with a hinged implant for severely stiff total knee arthroplasty

PurposeManagement of the severely stiff total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is challenging, with the outcome of revision arthroplasty being inferior compared to the outcome for other indications. The aim of this study was to analyse the outcome after revision TKA with hinged-type implants for severely stiff TKA [range of motion (ROM) ≤ 70°] at 2 years.MethodsA cohort of 38 patients with a hinged-type revision TKA (Waldemar Link or RT-Plus) and preoperative ROM ≤ 70° were selected from a prospectively collected database. ROM, visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain and satisfaction and Knee Society Score (KSS) were obtained preoperatively and at 3 months, 1 year and 2 years. Pre- and postoperative outcome were compared at 2 years.ResultsThere was a significant increase in ROM and KSS. VAS pain scores did not differ significantly. The median ROM at 2 years was 90° (range 50°–125°) with a median gain of 45° (range 5°–105°). Median VAS pain was 28.5 (range 0–96) points and median VAS satisfaction was 72 (range 0–100) points at 2 years. Twelve patients suffered a complication. Recurrent stiff knee was the most frequently reported complication (n = 5).ConclusionsHinged-type revision TKA following a severely stiff TKA renders a significant, although moderate, clinical improvement at 2 years.Level of evidenceRetrospective case series. Level IV.

Prognostic factors that predict failure of manipulation under anesthesia for the stiff total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review

PurposePrognostic factors associated with Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) failure remain unknown. MethodsA systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies that reported prognostic factors associated with MUA for postoperative stiffness. Results7 studies analyzing prognostic factors associated with MUA outcomes were included. Several studies note pre-MUA ROM to be a significant prognostic factor affecting post-MUA ROM at final follow-up. Knees with <70° of flexion pre-MUA had less final flexion arc than those with >70°. ConclusionsThe strongest prognostic factor for decreased ROM after MUA is severe pre-MUA stiffness.

Outcomes and Predictors of Success for Arthroscopic Lysis of Adhesions for the Stiff Total Knee Arthroplasty.

A stiff total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can manifest as pain and decreased range of motion (ROM). When conservative management including physical therapy and manipulation under anesthesia fails, arthroscopic lysis of adhesions (LOA) is frequently pursued. The authors examined the efficacy of LOA for the stiff TKA. They retrospectively reviewed the records of 18 patients who underwent LOA for stiff TKA between April 2013 and June 2016 and who failed to meet 90° ROM at 6 weeks postoperatively. They recorded patient demographics, ROM prior to TKA, and incidence of manipulation under anesthesia between initial TKA and LOA as well as pre- and postoperative outcomes of ROM, pain, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores. The mean time from TKA to LOA was 117 days, with a mean follow-up of 449 days. Mean improvements in ROM flexion contracture, flexion, and arc were 6.11° (P<.05), 29.45° (P<.001), and 35.56° (P<.001), respectively. Range of motion improved for 17 of 18 patients. The WOMAC was completed by 15 of 18 patients, with a mean improvement in scores of 32.23% (P<.001); all 15 patients with available WOMAC scores improved. Pain score improved by a mean of 2.17 (P<.001), with 14 of 18 patients reporting decreased pain. Improvements in flexion contracture, flexion, ROM arc, WOMAC scores, and pain were all statistically significant (P<.05). Age, weight, body mass index, and time to LOA were found to be statistically significant predictors of outcome. Finally, pre-TKA and pre-LOA ROM parameters were found to be statistically significant predictors of post-LOA ROM outcomes. [Orthopedics. 2017; 40(6):e1062-e1068.].

Treatment of stiff total knee arthroplasty

Stiffness is a disabling complication following total knee arthroplasty (TKA), leading to important limitation in the range of movement and affecting patient ability to perform daily activities. In this study, 25 records were considered to describe the most common treatment for prosthetic knee stiffness.

Predictors of outcome after manipulation under anaesthesia in patients with a stiff total knee arthroplasty.

Flexion in a stiff total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be improved by manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA). Although this intervention usually results in an improvement in range of motion, the expected result is not always achieved. The purpose of this study is to determine which factors affect range of motion after manipulation in patients with a stiff total knee. After exclusion (n=22), the data of 158 patients (138 knees) with a stiff knee after TKA who received a manipulation under anaesthesia between 2004 and 2014 were retrospectively analysed. Pre-, peri- and post-operative variables were identified and examined for their influence on flexion after the manipulation using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests and Spearman correlations. After MUA, a mean improvement in flexion of 30.3° was observed at the final follow-up. Preoperative TKA flexion, design of TKA and interval between TKA procedure and MUA were positive associated with an increase in flexion after MUA. MUA performed 12weeks or more after TKA procedure deteriorated the outcome. Three factors, pre-TKA flexion type of prosthesis and interval between TKA procedure and manipulation under anaesthesia, were found to have impact on flexion after TKA and MUA were identified. Results are expected to be inferior in patients with low flexion before TKA procedure or with a long interval (>12weeks) between the TKA procedure and the manipulation under anaesthesia. IV.

Management of the Stiff Total Knee Arthroplasty with Revision to a Total Condylar Bearing Rotating Platform Prosthesis

Purpose: Evaluate the efficacy of revision knee surgery with rotating platform prosthesis for treating stiffness associated with total knee arthroplasty. Methods: Between 2005 and 2007, twelve patients were treated by a single surgeon with a total condylar bearing rotating platform prosthesis for post-operative knee stiffness. Average age of patients was 60 years and the revision procedure was performed on average 8 months after the primary knee arthroplasty. Results: Post-operatively, all patients had stability to varus/valgus and anterior/posterior testing, and all patients had normal overall alignment. Knee extension increased an average of 16.3 degrees, knee flexion increased an average of 30.1 degrees, and total range of motion increased an average of 46.4 degrees. Modified knee score utilizing the range of motion, alignment, and stability components of the Knee Society Clinical Rating System increased an average of 17.9 points. All improvements were statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusion: Revision to a total condylar bearing rotating platform prosthesis significantly improves ROM and function while maintaining stability and alignment for patient suffering from stiffness following a total knee arthroplasty.

Conduite à tenir devant une raideur après prothèse totale du genou

A stiff total knee arthroplasty can be caused by a preexisting knee stiffness, technical errors, poor control of pain, postoperative complications and perhaps personal predisposition to postoperative arthrofibrosis and ossifications. Understanding of the mechanism of the stiffness is the first step. However, origin of the stiffness may remain unknown. Revisions for stiffness represent more than 10% of total knee arthroplasties revisions. Treatment options are closed manipulation, surgical or more recently arthroscopic arthrolysis and prosthetic exchange. Manipulation may be performed until 6weeks or two months after healing of the wound and, for this reason, clinical examination one month after the procedure is needed. Arthroscopic arthrolysis requires an experienced surgeon. It provides the best results in stiffness treated between 2 and 6months or a little bit more. After this delay, surgical arthrolysis or prosthetic exchange is indicated. Technical errors are identified by preoperative investigations. CT scan is needed to determine the rotation of both femoral and tibial components. Technical errors require prosthetic exchange unless patella alone is concerned, which is rare. In fact, patellar complications are frequently due to rotational tibial or femoral malpositions. It is difficult to identify some technical errors, such as unbalanced flexion and extension gaps before the revision and, for this reason, it is necessary to be able to perform a prosthetic exchange in any case. All these techniques require an early intensive and prolonged postoperative rehabilitation. Whichever the technique, patients may be disappointed by the result and for this reason careful information is mandatory. Poor results are more frequent when stiffness is unexplained.

Revision surgery for the stiff total knee arthroplasty.

The aim of this study was to examine the results of revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) undertaken for stiffness in the absence of sepsis or loosening. We present the results of revision surgery for stiff TKA in 48 cases (35 (72.9%) women and 13 (27.1%) men). The mean age at revision surgery was 65.5 years (42 to 83). All surgeries were performed by a single surgeon. Stiffness was defined as an arc of flexion of < 70° or a flexion contracture of > 15°. The changes in the range of movement (ROM) and the Western Ontario and McMasters Osteoarthritis index scores (WOMAC) were recorded. At a mean follow up of 59.9 months (12 to 272) there was a mean improvement in arc of movement of 45.0°. Mean flexion improved from 54.4° (5° to 100°) to 90° (10° to 125°) (p<0.05) and the mean flexion contracture decreased from 12.0° (0° to 45°) to 3.5° (0° to 25°) (p < 0.05). The mean WOMAC scores improved for pain, stiffness and function. In patients with extreme stiffness we describe a novel technique, which we have called the 'sloppy' revision. This entails downsizing the polyethylene insert by 4 mm and using a more constrained liner to retain stability. To our knowledge, this is the largest series of revision surgeries for stiffness reported in the literature where infection and loosening have been excluded. Whilst revision surgery is technically demanding, improvements in ROM and outcome can be achieved, particularly when the revision is within two years of the primary surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:622-7.

A Novel, Nonoperative Treatment Demonstrates Success for Stiff Total Knee Arthroplasty after Failure of Conventional Therapy.

Certain patients continue to suffer from knee stiffness following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) despite undergoing conventional therapies. Astym therapy to these patients may offer an effective, safe, nonoperative treatment. This study evaluates the effects of Astym therapy upon (1) range of motion and (2) subjective functional improvements in post-TKA patients who suffered from stiffness recalcitrant to other nonoperative interventions. Twenty-three post-TKA patients (29 knees) who had recalcitrant knee stiffness were included in this study. Pre- and post-Astym improvements in range of motion and Knee Society scores were compared. We analyzed knees based on the presence of flexion deficit or contracture. Further stratification was made into knees that received Astym therapy before and after a 3-month period of standard rehabilitation. Differences in range of motion from pre- to post-Astym were evaluated by measuring (1) degree of flexion deficit or contracture and (2) total arc of passive motion. Improvements in subjective functional status were determined by evaluating Knee Society scores pre- and post-Astym therapy. A two-tailed Student t-test was used to compare weighted mean differences from pre- to post-Astym for the above parameters. The mean flexion deficit improved significantly (p < 0.001) in all patients after Astym therapy. The mean flexion contracture improved significantly in (p = 0.001) in 91% of patients after Astym therapy. Knees with flexion deficits or contractures both improved in total arc of motion when compared with pretherapy. Overall, patients who underwent treatment with Astym therapy reported significant mean improvements in both Knee Society objective (80 vs. 57 points; p < 0.0001) and functional scores (80 vs. 54 points; p = 0.0003) when compared with their pretherapy objective and functional scores. No harms were reported. Astym therapy is a novel, nonoperative treatment that may be an effective treatment option for post-TKA patients suffering from persistent knee stiffness. Further studies are needed to validate this intervention as a part of cost-effective, standard treatment after TKA.

Timing of manipulation under anaesthesia for stiffness after total knee arthroplasty.

Stiffness following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a debilitating condition for the patient with limitation of functional outcome. There are various causes of stiffness, which can be classified as pre-operative, per-operative and post-operative. Arthrofibrosis is one of the causes, which can be managed in different ways, and manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) is routinely performed as the first line of management. The timing of MUA is often debated. We review the paper by Issa et al., which looks at the effect of timing of manipulation on a stiff TKA. They conclude that early manipulation within 12 weeks of performing the TKA had a higher mean flexion gain (36.5°), higher final range of motion (ROM) (119°) and higher knee society score (89 points) compared to those performed after 12 weeks which were 17°, 95° and 84 points respectively. Other studies have also reinforced the idea that early manipulation within 12 weeks has a better outcome than those performed after 12 weeks. There may still be a benefit of manipulation until 26 weeks after which open arthrolysis may be needed to improve ROM.

Moderate clinical improvement after revision arthroplasty of the severely stiff knee.

Revision of the severe stiff total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is challenging, and clinical outcome is inferior to other indications for revision. The purpose of the present study was to determine clinical outcome of TKA revision in patients with severe stiffness (range of motion (ROM)≤70°) and evaluate a possible influence of accompanying findings, such as component malposition, aseptic loosening or instability. A prospective cohort of 40 patients with a preoperative ROM≤70° and a minimum of 2-year follow-up after total system revision (Genesis or Legion stemmed condylar implant) was evaluated. ROM, Knee Society Scoring System (KSS) and visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores were obtained preoperatively and at 2years. Patient satisfaction and complication rate were assessed. Component malposition was most frequently reported as accompanying finding (n=27). Comparisons between pre- and postoperative outcome (p<0.05) and between different subgroups (component malposition, aseptic loosening, and instability) based on accompanying findings were made (no statistical comparison). ROM, KSS and VAS pain scores improved significantly (p<0.001): median ROM at two years 85° (range 10-125) and median gain 25° (range -10 to +85). Median VAS satisfaction was 53.5 points (range 15-98). Seventeen patients reported at least one complication, including one re-revision. Six patients underwent manipulation under anaesthesia, and five were referred to the pain clinic. No clear differences between subgroups were observed. TKA revision in patients with severe stiffness resulted in a moderate but significant improved clinical outcome after 2years. Accompanying abnormalities such as component malposition, aseptic loosening or instability did not influence clinical outcome. Realistic patient counselling on the moderate outcome and possible remaining limitations in daily life might help to improve patient satisfaction. Therapeutic studies-case series with no comparison group, Level IV.

Effect of repeated manipulation on range of motion in patients with stiff total knee arthroplasty.

Although manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) has been considered effective first-line treatment for stiff total knee arthroplasty (TKA), there is no consensus regarding the usefulness of repeated MUA. The purpose of this study was to investigate the usefulness of repeated MUA performed for patients in whom satisfactory range of motion (ROM) was not achieved by MUA. The authors retrospectively reviewed 15 patients who underwent repeated MUA after failure of initial MUA for stiff TKA. Demographic and ROM data were collected. A final ROM of less than 90° was considered a failed manipulation (failure group) and a final ROM of 90° or more was considered a successful manipulation (success group). Average pre-repeated MUA ROM (72.3°±19.5°) immediately improved to 112.3°±9.7° (P<.001) in the operating room, and final ROM was 89.6°±23.9°, an overall gain of 17.3° (P=.04). However, despite this overall ROM increase, a successful final ROM (90° or more) was achieved in approximately half of patients (7 of 13; 54%). There were no significant differences in demographics between the success and failure groups, except that there was significantly less pre-TKA ROM in the failure group (P=.02). There were no complications related to either the first or the repeated MUA procedures. The findings of this study suggest that repeated MUA can improve overall ROM for stiff TKA. The success rate of repeated MUA was less than that of primary MUA; however, it is a useful treatment modality for stiff TKA. Decreased pre-TKA ROM appeared to be associated with poor outcomes after repeated MUA.

Arthroscopic Lysis of Adhesions for the Stiff Total Knee Arthroplasty

The management of the stiff knee after total knee arthroplasty is controversial. Manipulation under anesthesia and open lysis of adhesions are techniques that can theoretically address the fibrous scar tissue, but their efficacy has been shown to be variable. We describe the technique of arthroscopic lysis of adhesions for the stiff knee after total knee arthroplasty. The advantages of this technique include minimally invasive debridement of scar tissue within defined compartments of the knee and evaluation for the presence and treatment of focal lesions (e.g., loose bodies or impinging synovial or soft tissue). The total arc of motion can be improved with a systematic arthroscopic approach.