Evaluating the Impact of Patellar Resurfacing in Medial Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Isaac Sontag-Milobsky; Giancarlo Riccobono; T. Jacob Selph; Kevin D. Hardt; David W. Manning

doi:10.1111/os.70371

Orthopaedic Surgery ›› 2026, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (8) :1700 -1709. DOI: 10.1111/os.70371

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Evaluating the Impact of Patellar Resurfacing in Medial Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Author information +

History +

PDF (1276KB)

Abstract

Objectives: Patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains a debated topic. Medial stabilized (MS) implants have gained popularity in the United States in recent years as they more closely mimic native femoral-tibial and patella-femoral knee kinematics. However, little is known about the effects of patellar resurfacing with a specific round-on-round, one-to-one congruent, medial stabilized implant. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether patellar resurfacing influences pain, function, patient-reported outcomes, and perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing primary MS TKA with this implant.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 107 patients undergoing primary MS TKA with the Sphere implant (Medacta International, Castel San Pietro, SZ). Patients were divided into resurfacing (R, n = 51) and non-resurfacing (NR, n = 56) groups. Outcomes included pain scores, range of motion (ROM), patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and perioperative variables. PROs collected included PROMIS Physical Function and Pain Interference CATs, Knee Society Score (KSS), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score (0–100), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), patellofemoral pain questionnaire, and the Samsung Medical Center (SMC) patellofemoral scoring system. Comparative statistical analyses were performed using chi-square tests, t-tests, and Mann–Whitney U tests.

Results: No significant differences were found in postoperative pain scores (VAS), opioid consumption, or overall PROMs between groups. However, the non-resurfacing group demonstrated greater ROM at 12 months (121.5° vs. 116.4°, p = 0.03) and higher KOOS ADL and symptom subscales. Resurfacing was associated with increased operative time (p < 0.001) and tourniquet time (p = 0.03); hospital LOS was shorter in the resurfacing group by six hours (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: In MS TKA, patellar resurfacing did not confer significant advantages in pain relief or functional outcomes at one year. These findings support an individualized approach to patellar resurfacing in MS TKA as each technique is deemed non-inferior.

Keywords

arthroplasty / articular / knee / osteoarthritis / patella / patient reported outcome measures / range of motion / replacement

Cite this article

Download citation ▾

Isaac Sontag-Milobsky, Giancarlo Riccobono, T. Jacob Selph, Kevin D. Hardt, David W. Manning. Evaluating the Impact of Patellar Resurfacing in Medial Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Orthopaedic Surgery, 2026, 18 (8) : 1700-1709 DOI:10.1111/os.70371

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户忘记密码

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within

[1]	I. Shichman, M. Roof, N. Askew, et al., “Projections and Epidemiology of Primary Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in Medicare Patients to 2040-2060,” JB JS Open Access 8, no. 1 (2020): e22.00112, https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.22.00112.

[2]	S. M. Sayah, S. Karunaratne, P. R. Beckenkamp, et al., “Clinical Course of Pain and Function Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression,” Journal of Arthroplasty 36, no. 12 (2021): 3993–4002.e37, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2021.06.019.

[3]	B. S. Ferket, Z. Feldman, J. Zhou, E. H. Oei, S. M. Bierma-Zeinstra, and M. Mazumdar, “Impact of Total Knee Replacement Practice: Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Data From the Osteoarthritis Initiative,” BMJ 356 (2017): j1131, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j1131.

[4]	F. Canovas and L. Dagneaux, “Quality of Life After Total Knee Arthroplasty,” Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Surgery & Research 104, no. 1 (2018): S41–S46, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2017.04.017.

[5]	H. Maradit-Kremers, O. J. Haque, W. K. Kremers, et al., “Is Selectively Not Resurfacing the Patella an Acceptable Practice in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty?,” Journal of Arthroplasty 32, no. 4 (2017): 1143–1147, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.10.014.

[6]

M. Grela, M. Barrett, S. K. Kunutsor, A. W. Blom, M. R. Whitehouse, and G. S. Matharu, “Clinical Effectiveness of Patellar Resurfacing, no Resurfacing and Selective Resurfacing in Primary Total Knee Replacement: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Interventional and Observational Evidence,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 23, no. 1 (2022): 932, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05877-7.

[7]	S. M. Hodgeson, T. Soeno, S. C. Mears, J. B. Stambough, C. L. Barnes, and B. M. Stronach, “The Medial Pivot Design in Total Knee Arthroplasty,” Orthopedic Clinics of North America 55, no. 1 (2024): 49–59, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2023.06.007.

[8]	L. Cooper, B. Owen, T. Soeno, et al., “Early Improvement in Postoperative Clinical Outcomes Without Patellar Resurfacing in Patella-Friendly Design of Medial Pivot TKA,” Journal of Knee Surgery 38 (2024): 512–517, https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2421-5572.

[9]	C. J. Simpson, N. Ng, S. Ndou, et al., “Patellar Resurfacing Was Not Associated With a Clinically Significant Advantage When a Modern Patellar Friendly Total Knee Arthroplasty Is Employed: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Knee 41 (2023): 329–341, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2023.01.021.

[10]

D. E. Gerow, S. R. Small, W. G. Lackey, J. L. Carter, and M. E. Berend, “Incidence of Anterior Knee Pain and Functional Difficulty in a Prospectively Recruited Cohort Following Total Knee Arthroplasty With Selective Patellar Resurfacing,” Journal of Arthroplasty 39, no. 1 (2024): 81–86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2023.06.029.

[11]

T. Karachalios, G. Komnos, M. Hantes, and S. Varitimidis, “Evaluating the “Patella-Friendly” Concept in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Minimum 15-Year Follow-Up Outcome Study Comparing Constant Radius, Multiradius Cruciate-Retaining, and Nonanatomical Cruciate-Retaining Implants,” Journal of Arthroplasty 36, no. 8 (2021): 2771–2778, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2021.03.007.

[12]	H. Behrend, K. Giesinger, J. M. Giesinger, and M. S. Kuster, “The “Forgotten Joint” as the Ultimate Goal in Joint Arthroplasty. Validation of a New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure,” Journal of Arthroplasty 27, no. 3 (2012): 430–436.e1, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2011.06.035.

[13]

N. D. Clement, C. E. H. Scott, D. F. Hamilton, D. MacDonald, and C. R. Howie, “Meaningful Values in the Forgotten Joint Score After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Minimal Clinical Important Difference, Minimal Important and Detectable Changes, and Patient-Acceptable Symptom State,” Bone & Joint Journal 103-B, no. 5 (2021): 846–854, https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.103B5.BJJ-2020-0396.R1.

[14]	L. C. Warth, M. K. Ishmael, E. R. Deckard, M. Ziemba-Davis, and R. M. Meneghini, “Do Medial Pivot Kinematics Correlate With Patient-Reported Outcomes After Total Knee Arthroplasty?,” Journal of Arthroplasty 32, no. 8 (2017): 2411–2416, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.03.019.

[15]	S. Case, W. C. Thomas, J. Edgington, D. Manning, and K. Hardt, “Closed Suction Drainage After Total Knee Arthroplasty With Concomitant Intravenous Tranexamic Acid Administration,” Journal of Knee Surgery 37, no. 4 (2024): 249–253, https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2045-8211.

[16]

A. I. Edelstein, S. Bhatt, J. Wright-Chisem, R. Sullivan, M. Beal, and D. W. Manning, “The Effect of Implant Design on Sagittal Plane Stability: A Randomized Trial of Medial- Versus Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty,” Journal of Knee Surgery 33, no. 5 (2020): 452–458, https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1678524.

[17]	M. G. Thomsen, H. Husted, K. S. Otte, G. Holm, and A. Troelsen, “Do Patients Care About Higher Flexion in Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blinded Trial,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 14 (2013): 127, https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-127.

[18]	A. L. Miner, E. A. Lingard, E. A. Wright, et al., “Knee Range of Motion After Total Knee Arthroplasty: How Important Is This as an Outcome Measure?,” Journal of Arthroplasty 18, no. 3 (2003): 286–294, https://doi.org/10.1054/arth.2003.50046.

[19]

P. J. Belmont, G. P. Goodman, B. R. Waterman, J. O. Bader, and A. J. Schoenfeld, “Thirty-Day Postoperative Complications and Mortality Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: Incidence and Risk Factors Among a National Sample of 15,321 Patients,” Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 96, no. 1 (2014): 20–26, https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.M.00018.

[20]	K. R. Duchman, A. J. Pugely, C. T. Martin, Y. Gao, N. A. Bedard, and J. J. Callaghan, “Operative Time Affects Short-Term Complications in Total Joint Arthroplasty,” Journal of Arthroplasty 32, no. 4 (2017): 1285–1291, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.12.003.

[21]	D. J. Johnson, J. P. Castle, M. J. Hartwell, A. M. D'Heurle, and D. W. Manning, “Risk Factors for Greater Than 24-Hour Length of Stay After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty,” Journal of Arthroplasty 35, no. 3 (2020): 633–637, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.10.037.