Comparison between the Results of Minimally Invasive Total Knee Arthroplasty Performed with Mini-Midvastus Technique and Quadriceps-Sparing Technique

PURPOSE: To compare the short-term clinical results of mini-midvatus minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty(TKA) with quadriceps-sparing minimally invasive TKA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between August 2005 and February 2006, 23 bilateral (46 knees) minimally invasive total knee arthroplasties were performed simultaneously using quadriceps-sparing surgical technique at one side and mini- midvastus minimally invasive technique at the contralateral side. The same surgeon performed all the operations with the same type of prosthesis(Nexgen LPS-flex Total Knee System) using MIS quadriceps-sparing instrument. The pos- toperative clinical and radiological results were analyzed in each group. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups in the operating time, total blood loss, length of skin incision, radiological results and postoperative HSS scores at 8 weeks and 1 year follow-up(p>0.05). Also, there were no differences in the postoperative range of motion and pain score assessed by visual analog scale at 1 day, 3 days, 7 days, 14 days, 8 weeks and 1 year follow-up(p>0.05). Conclusions: Compared to quadriceps-sparing TKA, mini-midvastus minimally invasive TKA revealed no significant differences in the short-term clinical and radiological results. Therefore, it can be considered as an effective, alternative minimally invasive technique.

Quad-Sparing Minimally Invasive Total Knee Arthroplasty

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate and define the factors affecting the success of quad-sparing (QS) minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty (TKA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 120 patients(150 knees) were tried consecutively to undergo QS minimally invasive TKA from July 2004 to February 2005. Seventy knees (Group 1) could be performed with this technique, but 80 knees (Group 2) were failed and required further incision. Two groups were compared for clinical, radiological and postoperative data. These cases were also divided into three groups according to the time undergone surgery. For these three groups, we analyzed the clinical data and surgical results. RESULTS: Age, height, weight, body mass index and pre-operative knee score were not significantly related to the success of QS minimally invasive TKA. Greater preoperative range of motion, low patella height, and smaller size of the tibial implant were of a significant correlation with the success of surgery. As the number of cases were cumulated, the success rate of this method increased and the operating time was shortened. CONCLUSION: QS minimally invasive TKA could not be successfully applied to every patients. For the success of this surgery, adequate preoperative assessment of the patient and sufficient experience on this surgical technique would be necessary.