Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-30T12:05:22.358Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 4 - Knee

from Section 2 - Adult Elective Orthopaedics and Spine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 November 2019

By
John Dabis  and
Deiary F. Kader
Edited by
Paul A. Banaszkiewicz  and
Deiary F. Kader
Paul A. Banaszkiewicz
Affiliation:
Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead
Deiary F. Kader
Affiliation:
Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead
Get access

Summary

Firstly, I would establish what are the symptoms the patient is suffering from. I would focus on pain, loss of function and severity of symptoms. I would like to know the exact location of the pain, alleviating and relieving factors, and where the pain is radiating to. How the pain is affecting activities of daily living such as cutting toenails, putting shoes and socks on, how easy it is to go up and down stairs are all questions I would ask. Treatment to date is also important; has the patient had any physiotherapy/rehabilitation, trialled any analgesics? Previous surgical procedures need to be established. Assessment of the effect of osteoarthritis on the patient’s function, quality of life, occupation, mood, relationships and leisure activities is also important. Clinical examination findings such as assessment of the soft tissue envelope is also important. Severity of the deformity in the coronal plane will need to be established. A fixed flexion deformity should also be noted. The competency of the knee collateral ligaments and degree of deformity correction should be assessed in order to plan the type of implants.

Type
Chapter
Information
Postgraduate Orthopaedics
Viva Guide for the FRCS (Tr & Orth) Examination
 , pp. 67 - 95
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Perry, KI, MacDonald, SJ. The obese patient: a problem of larger consequence. Bone Joint J. 2016;98(1 Supple A):3–5.Google Scholar
Arnold, JB, Walters, JL, Solomon, LB, Thewlis, D. Does the method of component fixation influence clinical outcomes after total knee replacement? A systematic literature review. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(5):740–746.Google Scholar
Campbell, MK, Fiddian, N, Fitzpatrick, R, et al. The Knee Arthroplasty Trial (KAT): design features, baseline characteristics and two-year functional outcomes after alternative approaches to knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(1):134–141.Google Scholar
Fransen, BL, van Duijvenbode, DC, Hoozemans, MJ, Burger, BJ. No differences between fixed-and mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017;25(6):1757–1777.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van der Voort, P, Pijls, BG, Nouta, KA, Valstar, ER, Jacobs, WC, Nelissen, RG. A systematic review and meta-regression of mobile-bearing versus fixed-bearing total knee replacement in 41 studies. Bone Joint J. 2013 Sep 1;95(9):1209–1216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bercik, MJ, Joshi, A, Parvizi, J. Posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(3):439–444.Google Scholar
Huang, T, Long, Y, George, D, Wang, W. Meta-analysis of gap balancing versus measured resection techniques in total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J. 2017;99(2):151–158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LaPrade, RF, Heikes, C, Bakker, AJ, Jakobsen, RB. The reproducibility and repeatability of varus stress radiographs in the assessment of isolated fibular collateral ligament and grade-III posterolateral knee injuries: an in vitro biomechanical study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(10):2069–2076.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krukhaug, Y, Mølster, A, Rodt, A, Strand, T. Lateral ligament injuries of the knee. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1998;6(1):21–25.Google Scholar
Levy, BA, Dajani, KA, Morgan, JA, Shah, JP, Dahm, DL, Stuart, MJ. Repair versus reconstruction of the fibular collateral ligament and posterolateral corner in the multiligament-injured knee. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(4):804–809.Google Scholar
Geeslin, AG, LaPrade, RF. Outcomes of treatment of acute grade-III isolated and combined posterolateral knee injuries: a prospective case series and surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(18):1672–1683.Google Scholar
Westermann, RW, Spindler, KPHuston, LJ, Wolf, BR. Posterolateral corner repair versus reconstruction: 6-year outcomes from a prospective multicenter cohort. Orthop J Sports Med. 2017;5(7_suppl6).Google Scholar
Arnoczky, SP, Warren, RF. Microvasculature of the human meniscus. Am J Sports Med. 1982;10:90–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McPherson, EJ, Woodson, C, Holtom, P, Roidis, N, Shufelt, C, Patzakis, M. Periprosthetic total hip infection: outcomes using a staging system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;403:8–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Della Valle, C, Parvizi, J, Bauer, TW, et al. Diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infections of the hip and knee. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010;18(12):760–770.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parvizi, J, Zmistowski, B, Berbari, EF, et al. New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(11):2992.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deirmengian, C, Kardos, K, Kilmartin, P, et al. The alpha-defensin test for periprosthetic joint infection outperforms the leukocyte esterase test strip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(1):198–203.Google Scholar
Ding, H, Yao, J, Chang, W, Liu, F. Comparison of the efficiency of static versus articular spacers in two-stage revision surgery for the treatment of infection following total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2017;12(1):151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorlund, JB, Juhl, CB, Roos, EM, Lohmander, LS. Arthroscopic surgery for degenerative knee: systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits and harms. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(19):1229–1235.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barton, SB, McLauchlan, GJ, Canty, SJ. The incidence and impact of arthroscopy in the year prior to total knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2017;24(2):396–401.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fu, D, Li, G, Chen, K, Zhao, Y, Hua, Y, Cai, Z. Comparison of high tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the treatment of unicompartmental osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(5):759–765.Google Scholar
Preston, S, Howard, J, Naudie, D, Somerville, L, McAuley, J. Total knee arthroplasty after high tibial osteotomy: no differences between medial and lateral osteotomy approaches. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(1):105–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tadros, BJ, Dabis, J, Twyman, R. Short-term outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the octogenarian population. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(5):1571–1576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ali, AM, Pandit, H, Liddle, AD, et al. Does activity affect the outcome of the Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement? Knee. 2016;23(2):327–330.Google Scholar
Pandit, H, Jenkins, C, Gill, HS, et al. Unnecessary contraindications for mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93(5):622–628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lisowski, LA, Meijer, LI, Bekerom, MP, Pilot, P, Lisowski, AE. Ten- to 15-year results of the Oxford Phase III mobile unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a prospective study from a non-designer group. Bone Joint J. 2016; 98B(10 Supple B):41–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, P, Jameson, S, Critchley, R, Reed, M, Gregg, P, Deehan, D. Center and surgeon volume influence the revision rate following unicondylar knee replacement: an analysis of 23,400 medial cemented unicondylar knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(8):702–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meding, JB, Wing, JT, Ritter, MA. Does high tibial osteotomy affect the success or survival of a total knee replacement? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(7):1991–1994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niinimäki, T, Eskelinen, A, Ohtonen, P, Puhto, AP, Mann, BS, Leppilahti, J. Total knee arthroplasty after high tibial osteotomy: a registry-based case–control study of 1,036 knees. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014;134(1):73–77.Google Scholar
Xie, X, Liu, X, Chen, Z, Yu, Y, Peng, S, Li, Q. A meta-analysis of bone–patellar tendon–bone autograft versus four-strand hamstring tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee. 2015;22(2):100–110.Google Scholar
Xie, X, Xiao, Z, Li, Q, et al. Increased incidence of osteoarthritis of knee joint after ACL reconstruction with bone–patellar tendon–bone autografts than hamstring autografts: a meta-analysis of 1,443 patients at a minimum of 5 years. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2015;25(1):149–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howell, SM, Taylor, MA. Failure of reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament due to impingement by the intercondylar roof. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75(7):1044–1055.Google Scholar
Webster, KE, Feller, JA, Hartnett, N, Leigh, WB, Richmond, AK. Comparison of Patellar tendon and hamstring tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a 15-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Am J Sports Med. 2016;44(1):83–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grassi, A, Nitri, M, Moulton, SG, et al. Does the type of graft affect the outcome of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A meta-analysis of 32 studies. Bone Joint J. 2017;99B(6):714–723.Google Scholar
Koh, IJ, Cho, WS, Choi, NY, Parvizi, J, Kim, TK; Korea Knee Research Group. How accurate are orthopaedic surgeons in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection after total knee arthroplasty? A multicenter study. Knee. 2015;22(3):180–185.Google Scholar
Amis, AA, Firer, P, Mountney, J, Senavongse, W, Thomas, NP. Anatomy and biomechanics of the medial patellofemoral ligament. The Knee. 2003;10(3):215–220.Google Scholar
Schöttle, PB, Schmeling, A, Rosenstiel, N, Weiler, A. Radiographic landmarks for femoral tunnel placement in medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35(5):801–804.Google Scholar
Dejour, H, Walch, G, Nove-Josserand, L, Guier, C. Factors of patellar instability: an anatomic radiographic study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1994;2(1):19–26.Google Scholar
Yeung, M, Leblanc, MC, Ayeni, OR, et al. Indications for medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. J Knee Surg. 2016;29(7):543–554.Google Scholar
Steensen, RN, Bentley, JC, Trinh, TQ, Backes, JR, Wiltfong, RE. The prevalence and combined prevalences of anatomic factors associated with recurrent patellar dislocation: a magnetic resonance imaging study. Am J Sports Med. 2015;43:921–927.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mandalia, V, Eyres, K, Schranz, P, Toms, AD. Evaluation of patients with a painful total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90(3):265–271.Google Scholar
Nicoll, D, Rowley, DI. Internal rotational error of the tibial component is a major cause of pain after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92B:1238–1244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, RA, Crossett, LS, Jacobs, JJ, Rubash, HE. Malrotation causing patellofemoral complications after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 1998;356:144–153.Google Scholar
Paley, D, Herzenberg, JE, Tetsworth, K, McKie, J, Bhave, A. Deformity planning for frontal and sagittal plane corrective osteotomies. Orthop Clin North Am. 1994;25(3):425–465.Google Scholar
Bonasia, DE, Dettoni, F, Sito, G, et al. Medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy for medial compartment overload/arthritis in the varus knee: prosthetic factors. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42(3):690–698.Google Scholar
Staubli, AE, Jacob, HAC. Evolution of open-wedge high-tibial osteotomy: experience with a special angular stable device for internal fixation without interposition material. Int Orthop. 2010;34(2):167–172.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×