Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate outcomes and complica-tions rates between inlay and onlay patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA). Methods: According to the PRISMA statement, 42 studies with 2552 patients were included. Data considered for quantitative analysis consisted of the Knee Society Score (KSS), the range of motion (ROM), the visual analogue score (VAS), and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities questionnaire (WOMAC). Complications and revision surgery were considered. Results: Data on postoperative KSS showed no differences between the groups. The ROM was evaluated in 8 studies for 70 and 331 inlay and onlay PFA, respectively. Onlay group was favorable in terms of postoperative ROM. Postoperative VAS was available for 64 inlay and 110 onlay and no differences were found. Data on postoperative WOMAC were avail-able for 49 inlay and 527 onlay PFA and inlay group showed better scores. A statistically significant higher rate of instability, persistent pain, malposition, stiffness, deep infection, disease progression, and wear of the patellar component were noted in the inlay group. A higher rate of lateral release was noted in the onlay group. A higher number of manipula-tions under anesthesia was noted in the inlay group. The revision to total knee arthroplasty was reported more frequently in the inlay group. Conclusion: A higher rate of conversion to total knee arthroplasty and complication rates after inlay technique was found. The potential of achieving better WOMAC scores with the inlay technique should be weighed against the higher complication and revision rates compared to the onlay technique. Level of Evidence: IV. (c) 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Outcomes and complications of inlay versus onlay patellofemoral arthroplasty: A systematic review

Galasso, Olimpio;
2023-01-01

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate outcomes and complica-tions rates between inlay and onlay patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA). Methods: According to the PRISMA statement, 42 studies with 2552 patients were included. Data considered for quantitative analysis consisted of the Knee Society Score (KSS), the range of motion (ROM), the visual analogue score (VAS), and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities questionnaire (WOMAC). Complications and revision surgery were considered. Results: Data on postoperative KSS showed no differences between the groups. The ROM was evaluated in 8 studies for 70 and 331 inlay and onlay PFA, respectively. Onlay group was favorable in terms of postoperative ROM. Postoperative VAS was available for 64 inlay and 110 onlay and no differences were found. Data on postoperative WOMAC were avail-able for 49 inlay and 527 onlay PFA and inlay group showed better scores. A statistically significant higher rate of instability, persistent pain, malposition, stiffness, deep infection, disease progression, and wear of the patellar component were noted in the inlay group. A higher rate of lateral release was noted in the onlay group. A higher number of manipula-tions under anesthesia was noted in the inlay group. The revision to total knee arthroplasty was reported more frequently in the inlay group. Conclusion: A higher rate of conversion to total knee arthroplasty and complication rates after inlay technique was found. The potential of achieving better WOMAC scores with the inlay technique should be weighed against the higher complication and revision rates compared to the onlay technique. Level of Evidence: IV. (c) 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
2023
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11386/4860496
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact