posted on 2013-01-17, 11:43authored byStephen A. Bridgman, Gayle Walley, Gilbert MackenzieGilbert Mackenzie, Darren Clement, David Griffiths, Nicola Maffulli
In a prospective single-centre longitudinal randomized controlled trial 116 patients were allocated to the sub-vastus approach, and 115 to the medial parapatellar approach. At one week follow-up, compared to baseline, range of motion, Knee Society (KS) global, KS knee, and KS pain scores were significantly better in the sub-vastus group. At the one year follow-up, WOMAC global and pain scores, SF36 physical function and
role-physical scores, and EuroQol utility and pain score were significantly better in the sub-vastus group. The ease of exposure in the sub-vastus approach was significantly worse. There was no significant difference in length of stay or analgesia intake. The sub-vastus approach to total knee arthroplasty was more effective than a medial parapatellar approach at both one week and one year post-operatively, but surgeons reported a less
easy exposure in the sub-vastus group.
History
Publication
The Knee;16(3), pp. 216-22
Publisher
Elsevier
Note
peer-reviewed
Rights
This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in The Knee. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in The Knee, 16(3), pp. 216-222 doi:10.1016/j.knee.2008.11.012