medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2022, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2022; 36 (4)

Evaluation of bleeding, pain and operative time of the midvasto versus medial parapatellar approach in primary total knee arthroplasty for grade IV osteoarthrosis

Escobar-Carrillo C, Maqueda-Quintanilla L, Arias-Arceo A, Colín-Vázquez A, Rivera-Villa A

Language: Spanish
References: 28
Page: 210-215
PDF size: 128.13 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: total knee arthroplasty is a common procedure in orthopedic surgery for treating grade IV knee osteoarthritis. This procedure reduces pain and improves functionality. However, the results according to the approach are different, it is not clear which surgical approach is clearly superior. The objective of this study is to evaluate the time and post-surgical bleeding, as well as the postoperative pain of the midvasto versus medial parapatellar approach in primary total knee arthroplasty in grade IV gonarthrosis. Material and methods: an observational, comparative, retrospective study was carried out from June 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020, including beneficiaries of the Mexican Social Security Institute over 18 years of age with a diagnosis of grade IV knee osteoarthritis scheduled for primary total knee arthroplasty in the absence of other inflammatory pathology, previous osteotomies or coagulopathies. Results: of 99 patients who underwent the midvasto approach (group M) and 100 patients to the medial parapatellar approach (group T), there was preoperative hemoglobin 14.7 g/l group M and 15.2 g/l group T, reduction was 5.0 g/l group M and 4.6 g/l group T. Significant pain reduction in both groups without significant difference; from 6.7 to 3.2 group M and from 6.7 to 3.1 group T. The surgical time was significantly longer with the medial parapatellar approach (98.7 versus 89.2 minutes). Conclusions: both approaches represent an excellent access route to perform primary total knee arthroplasty; however, no significant differences were found in the volume of bleeding or in the reduction of pain, the midvaste approach was associated with shorter surgical time and less involvement of flexion of the knee. Therefore, the midvasto approach is recommended in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty.


REFERENCES

  1. Torres L del P. Diagnóstico, prevención y tratamiento del adulto con osteoartrosis de rodilla. CENETEC. 2014; 75.

  2. Corti MC. Epidemiology of osteoarthritis: prevalence, risk factors and functional impact. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2003; 15(5): 359-63.

  3. Cajigas MJC, Ariza AR, Espinosa MR, Méndez MC, Mirassou OM, San Román MR, et al. Guía de práctica clínica basada en la evidencia para el diagnóstico y tratamiento de la osteoartritis. Med Interna Mex. 2011; 27(6): 552-72.

  4. Espinoza-Morales R, Pérez-Bastidas ME. Enfoque terapéutico actual de la osteoartritis. Reumatol Clin. 2005; 1 (Suppl 2): S8-15.

  5. Martínez R, Martínez C, Calvo R. Osteoartritis (artrosis) de rodilla. Rev Chil Ortop Traumatol. 2015; 56(3): 45-51.

  6. Espinosa-Morales R, Alcántar-Ramírez J, Arce-Salinas CA, Chávez-Espina LM, Esquivel-Valerio J, Gutiérrez-Gómez JJ, et al. Reunión multidisciplinaria de expertos para el diagnóstico y tratamiento de la osteoartritis. Actualización basada en evidencias. Med Int Mex. 2018; 34(3): 443-76.

  7. Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. Guía de referencia rápida: diagnóstico y tratamiento de osteoartrosis de rodilla. IMSS-079-08. Ciudad de México: 2007. Disponible en: http://www.imss.gob.mx/sites/all/statics/guiasclinicas/494GRR.pdf

  8. Simental-mendía MA, Vílchez-Cavazos JF. Platelet-rich plasma in knee osteoarthritis treatment. Cir Cir. 2015; 83(4): 352-8.

  9. Mena PR. Caracterización de pacientes con gonartrosis de rodilla. Centro de Diagnóstico Integral "Concepción". Rev Habanera Ciencias Médicas. 2002; 15(1): 17-26.

  10. Álvarez-López CA, García-Lorenzo YC. Relación entre deformidad angular y gonartrosis primaria. Acta Ortop Mex. 2015; 29(4): 232-6.

  11. Hunter DJ, Felson DT. Osteoarthritis. BMJ. 2006; 332(7542): 639-42.

  12. Braun HJ, Gold GE. Diagnosis of osteoarthritis: imaging. Bone. 2012; 51(2): 278-88.

  13. Van Manen MD, Nace J, Mont MA. Management of primary knee osteoarthritis and indications for total knee arthroplasty for general practitioners. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2012; 112(11): 709-15.

  14. Señaris RJ, Pampliega MT, Velasco MJ. Valoración prospectiva del abordaje anterior de rodilla sobre la línea media. Mapfre Med. 2003; 14(1): 32-6.

  15. Aguilera ZJM, Cruz LF, Encalada DIM, Villalobos GFE. Abordajes quirúrgicos en la artroplastía total de rodilla. Acta Ortop Mex. 2000; 14 (3): 275-9.

  16. Engh GA, Holt BT, Parks NL. A midvastus muscle-splitting approach for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1997; 12(3): 322-31.

  17. Cooper RE Jr, Trinidad G, Buck WR. 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. 1999; 14(4): 505-8.

  18. Hube R, Sotereanos NG, Reichel H. The midvastus approach for total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol. 2002; 10(3): 235-44.

  19. Xu SZ, Lin XJ, Tong X, Wang XW. Minimally invasive midvastus versus standard parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One. 2014; 9(5): e95311.

  20. Avci CC, Gülabi D, Erdem M, Kurnaz R, Günes T, Bostan B. Minimal invasive midvastus versus standard parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2013; 47(1): 1-7.

  21. Verburg H, Mathijssen NM, Niesten DD, Verhaar JA, Pilot P. Comparison of mini-midvastus and conventional total knee arthroplasty with clinical and radiographic evaluation: a prospective randomized clinical trial with 5-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016; 98(12): 1014-22.

  22. Singh JA. Epidemiology of knee and hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. Open Orthop J. 2011; 5: 80-5.

  23. Skinner D, Tadros BJ, Bray E, Elsherbiny M, Stafford G. Clinical outcome following primary total hip or knee replacement in nonagenarians. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2016; 98(4): 258-64.

  24. Ritter MA, Wing JT, Berend ME, Davis KE, Meding JB. The clinical effect of gender on outcome of total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2008; 23(3): 331-6.

  25. Laskin RS, Beksac B, Phongjunakorn A, Pittors K, Davis J, Shim JC, et al. Minimally invasive total knee replacement through a mini-midvastus incision: an outcome study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; (428): 74-81.

  26. Varela-Egocheaga JR, Suárez-Suárez MA, Fernández-Villán M, González-Sastre V, Varela-Gómez JR, Rodríguez-Merchán C. Minimally invasive subvastus approach: improving the results of total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010; 468(5): 1200-8.

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

  28. Vaishya R, Vijay V, Demesugh DM, Agarwal AK. Surgical approaches for total knee arthroplasty. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2016; 7(2): 71-9.



EVIDENCE LEVEL

III




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com