Skip to main content
Log in

Midvastus approach in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, double-blinded study on early rehabilitation

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

The medial parapatellar approach has become the standard technique in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, recent studies have reported superior results regarding functional recovery when using the midvastus approach. It was the aim of this study to evaluate the early functional outcome of both surgical techniques. In a prospective, double-blinded, randomized study, 50 patients for TKA were consecutively operated on either by the medial parapatellar or the midvastus approach. Exclusion criteria were defined as previous open knee surgery and leg deformity of more than 10° varus or valgus. TKA was performed in all patients by one surgeon using the same type of implants in both groups. Pain scores (VAS) were documented and follow-up data including quadriceps strength and proprioception were obtained 3 weeks and 6 weeks postoperatively. Both groups were comparable in preoperative demographic data. Postoperatively, patients in the midvastus group demonstrated significantly lower pain in rest (VAS: mean 2.25 vs. 3.03) and under movement (VAS: mean 2.92 vs. 3.13). Further, they showed superior isometric quadriceps strength at 3 weeks (41.4 vs. 27.6 Nm) and 6 weeks (47.6 vs. 35.5 Nm). Moreover, this group showed a superior postoperative proprioception, while the range of motion was similar in both groups. The midvastus approach offers advantages over the standard parapatellar arthrotomy, in the early rehabilitation period. No adverse effects were observed associated with this approach. Therefore, the midvastus approach should be considered as a valuable alternative in TKA.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Boyd AD, Ewald FC, Thomas WH, Poss R, Sledge CB (1993) Long-term complications after total knee arthroplasty with or without resurfacing of the patella. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75:674–681

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brick GW, Scott RD (1988) The patellofemoral component of total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 231:163–178

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cila E, Guzel V, Ozalay M, Tan J, Simsek SA, Kanatli U, Ozturk A (2002) Subvastus versus medial parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 122:65–68

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cooper RE, Trinidad G, Buck WR (1999) Midvastus approach in total knee arthroplasty: a description and a cadaveric study determining the distance of the popliteal artery from the patellar margin of the incision. J Arthroplasty 14:505–508

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dalury DF, Jiranek WA (1999) A comparison of the midvastus and paramedian approaches for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 14:33–37

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  7. Engh GA, Parks NL (1998) Surgical technique of the midvastus arthrotomy. Clin Orthop 351:270–274

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  9. Faure BT, Benjamin JB, Lindsey B, Volz RG, Schutte D (1993) Comparison of the subvastus and paramedian surgical approaches in bilateral knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 8:511–516

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fisher DA, Trimble SM, Breedlove K (1998) The medial trivector approach in total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 21:53–56

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hofmann AA, Plaster RL, Murdock LE (1991) Subvastus (Southern) approach for primary total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 269:70–77

    Google Scholar 

  12. Holtby RM, Grosso P (1996) Osteonecrosis and resorption of the patella after total knee replacement: a case report. Clin Orthop 328:155–158

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kayler DE, Lyttle D (1988) Surgical interruption of patellar blood supply by total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 229:221–227

    Google Scholar 

  14. Keating EM, Faris PM, Meding JB, Ritter MA (1999) Comparison of the midvastus muscle-splitting approach with the median parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 14:29–32

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Keblish PA (2002) Alternate surgical approaches in mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 25:257–264

    Google Scholar 

  16. Laskin RS (1976) Modular total knee-replacement arthroplasty. A review of eighty-nine patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 58:766–773

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lord SR, Menz HB, Tiedemann A (2003) A physiological profile approach to falls risk assessment and prevention. Phys Ther 83:237–252

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lynch AF, Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB (1987) Extensor mechanism complications following total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2:135–140

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Maestro A, Suarez MA, Rodriguez L, Guerra C, Murcia A (2000) The midvastus surgical approach in total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 24:104–107

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Parentis MA, Rumi MN, Deol GS, Kothari M, Parrish WM, Pellegrini VD (1999) A comparison of the vastus splitting and median parapatellar approaches in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 367:107–116

    Google Scholar 

  21. Riley LH, Hungerford DS (1978) Geometric total knee replacement for treatment of the rheumatoid knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 60:523–527

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Roysam GS, Oakley MJ (2001) Subvastus approach for total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, and observer-blinded trial. J Arthroplasty 16:454–457

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Scapinelli R, Aglietti P, Baldovin M, Giron F, Teitge R (2002) Biologic resurfacing of the patella: current status. Clin Sports Med 21:547–573

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Scott WN, Rubinstein M, Scuderi G (1988) Results after knee replacement with a posterior cruciate-substituting prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 70:1163–1173

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Scuderi G, Scharf SC, Meltzer L, Nisonson B, Scott WN (1987) Evaluation of patella viability after disruption of the arterial circulation. Am J Sports Med 15:490–493

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Silva M, Shepherd EF, Jackson WO, Pratt JA, McClung CD, Schmalzried TP (2003) Knee strength after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 18:605–611

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. White RE, Allman JK, Trauger JA, Dales BH (1999) Clinical comparison of the midvastus and medial parapatellar surgical approaches. Clin Orthop 367:117–122

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Holger Bäthis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bäthis, H., Perlick, L., Blum, C. et al. Midvastus approach in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, double-blinded study on early rehabilitation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 13, 545–550 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-004-0574-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-004-0574-9

Keywords

Navigation