Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Mini-midvastus versus mini-medial parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized study

  • Knee Arthroplasty
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

To date, no English literature has evaluated the short-term results of the mini-medial parapatellar approach compared with the mini-midvastus approach. This prospective, randomized study was performed to compare the short-term results of total knee arthroplasty using either a mini-midvastus or a mini-medial parapatellar approach.

Patients and methods

We reported the clinical and radiological results of 89 patients who had primary total knee arthroplasties with minimally invasive techniques using either a mini-midvastus or a mini-medial parapatellar approach. The mini-midvastus approach was used on 45 patients (group I) and a mini-medial parapatellar approach on 44 patients (group II). Skin incision length, tourniquet time, incidence of lateral retinacular release, total blood loss, straight leg raising time, visual analogy scale score, alignment of the knee, component position, and complication of each group were examined. Knee Society scores, range of motion were compared at 7 days, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively.

Results

The mean tourniquet time was 68 min in group I, significantly longer than 56 min for group II. However, comparisons of postoperative knee scores and function scores between both approaches did not yield a significant difference in outcome. No significant difference was found with respect to total blood loss, visual analogy scale score, straight-leg-raising test, range of motion or radiographic findings.

Conclusion

Based on these results, we believe that the early results are similar between mini-midvastus and mini-medial parapatellar approach, ultimately the selection of the surgical approach will depend on the surgeon’s experience and preference.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Stern SH, Insall JN (1992) Posterior stabilized prosthesis: results after follow-up of nine to twelve years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74:980–986

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Ranawat CS, Flynn WF, Saddler S et al (1993) Long-term results of the total condylar knee arthroplasty: a 15-year survivorship study. Clin Orthop 286:94–102

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Colizza WA, Insall JN, Scuderi GR (1995) The posterior stabilized total knee prosthesis: assessment of polyethylene damage and osteolysis after a ten-year-minimum follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 77:1713–1720

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Font-Rodriguez DE, Scuderi GR, Insall JN (1997) Survivorship of cemented total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 345:79–86

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Pavone V, Boettner F, Fickert S et al (2001) Total condylar knee arthroplasty: a long-term follow up. Clin Orthop 388:18–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Buechel FF Sr (2002) Long-term follow-up after mobile bearing total knee replacement. Clin Orthop 404:40–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Keating EM, Meding JB, Faris PM et al (2002) Long-term follow-up of nonmodular total knee replacements. Clin Orthop 404:34–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Repicci JA, Eberle RW (1999) Minimally invasive surgical technique for unicondylar knee arthroplasty. J South Orthop Assoc 8:20–27

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Scuderi GR, Tenholder M, Capeci C (2004) Surgical approaches in mini incision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 428:61–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tenholder M, Clarke HD, Scuderi GR (2005) Minimal-incision total knee arthroplasty: the early clinical experience. Clin Orthop 440:67–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Haas SB, Cook S, Beksac B (2004) Minimally invasive total knee replacement through a mini midvastus approach: a comparative study. Clin Orthop 428:68–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Laskin RS, Beksac B, Phongjunakorn A et al (2004) Minimally invasive total knee replacement through a mini-midvastus incision: an outcome study. Clin Orthop 428:74–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Laskin RS (2005) Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: the results justify its use. Clin Orthop 440:54–59

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Haas SB, Manitta MA, Burdick P (2006) Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: the mini midvastus approach. Clin Orthop 452:112–116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Karachalios Th, Giotikas D, Roidis N (2008) Total knee replacement performed with either a mini-midvastus or a standard approach: a prospective randomized clinical and radiological trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90:584–592

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Boerger TO, Aglietti P, Mondanelli N et al (2005) Mini-subvastus versus medial parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 440:82–87

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Schroer WC, Diesfeld PJ, Reedy ME, LeMarr AR (2008) Mini-subvastus approach for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1:19–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tria AJ Jr, Coon TM (2003) Minimal incision total knee arthroplasty: early experience. Clin Orthop 416:185–190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chen AF, Alan RK, Redziniak DE et al (2006) Quadriceps sparing total knee replacement: the initial experience with results at two to four years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:1448–1453

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim YH, Kim JS, Kim DY (2007) Clinical outcome and rate of complications after primary total knee replacement performed with quadriceps-sparing or standard arthrotomy. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89:467–470

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Aglietti P, Baldini A, Sensi L (2006) Quadriceps-sparing versus mini-subvastus approach in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 452:106–111

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Tashiro Y, Miura H, Matsuda S et al (2007) Minimally invasive versus standard approach in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 463:144–150

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bonutti PM, Neal DJ, Kester MA (2003) Minimal incision total knee arthroplasty using the suspended leg technique. Orthopedics 26:899–903

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bonutti PM, Mont MA, McMahon M, Ragland PS, Kester M (2004) Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:26–32

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bonutti PM, Mont MA, Kester MA (2004) Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: a 10 feature evolutionary approach. Orthop Clin North Am 35:217–226

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kosilek FR, Bonutti PM, Hozack WJ et al (2007) Clinical experience using a minimally invasive surgical approach for total knee arthroplasty: early results of a prospective randomized study compared to a standard approach. J Arthroplasty 22:8–13

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ewald FC (1989) The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop 248:9–12

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Price A, Webb J, Topf H et al (2001) Rapid recovery after oxford unicompartmental arthroplasty through a short incision. J Arthroplasty 16:970–976

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Argenson JN, Flecher X (2004) Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 11:341–347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Harwin SF (2003) The medial parapatellar approach to the knee. J Knee Surg 16:43–47

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Insall JN (1971) A midline approach to the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 53:1584–1589

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Engh GA, Holt BT, Parks NL (1997) A midvastus muscle-splitting approach for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 12:322–331

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Dalury DF, Dennis DA (2005) Mini-incision total knee arthroplasty can increase risk of component malalignment. Clin Orthop 440:77–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Silva M, Shepherd EF, Jackson WO et al (2003) Knee strength after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 18:605–611

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Pagnano MW, Meneghini RM, Trousdale RT (2006) Anatomy of the extensor mechanism in reference to quadriceps-sparing TKA. Clin Orthop 452:102–105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Holt G, Nunn T, Allen RA et al (2008) Variation of the vastus medialis obliquus insertion and its relevance to minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 23:600–604

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Parentis MA, Rumi MN, Deol GS et al (1999) A comparison of the vastus splitting and median parapatellar approaches in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 367:107–116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Johnson DP, Eastwood DM (1992) Lateral patellar release in knee arthroplasty: effect on wound healing. J Arthroplasty 7:427–431

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Scuderi GR, Scharf SC, Meltzer LP et al (1987) The relationship of lateral releases to patella viability in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2:209–214

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Ritter MA, Campbell ED (1987) Postoperative patellar complications with or without lateral release during total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 219:163–168

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Engh GA, Parks NL, Ammeen DJ (1996) Influence of the surgical approach on lateral retinacular releases in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 331:56–63

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Nestor BJ, Toulson CE, Backus SI et al (2010) Mini-midvastus vs. standard medial parapatellar approach: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study in patients undergoing bilateral total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 25:5–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Ritter MA, Faris PM, Keating EM et al (1994) Postoperative alignment of total knee replacement: its effect on survival. Clin Orthop 299:153–156

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Fehring TK, Odum S, Griffin WL et al (2001) Early failures in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 392:315–318

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopedic Department, The Affiliated Taizhou People’s Hospital of Nantong University, Taizhou, 225300, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China

    Zhenxiang Zhang, Wei Zhu, Beibei Gu, Lixian Zhu & Chunmao Chen

Authors
  1. Zhenxiang Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wei Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Beibei Gu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lixian Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chunmao Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhenxiang Zhang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zhang, Z., Zhu, W., Gu, B. et al. Mini-midvastus versus mini-medial parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 133, 389–395 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-012-1645-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-012-1645-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation