Patellofemoral arthroplasty versus total knee arthroplasty for patients with patellofemoral osteoarthritis: equal function and satisfaction but higher revision rate for partial arthroplasty at a minimum eight years' follow-up.

AIMS: The primary aim of this study was to compare the knee-specific functional outcome of patellofemoral arthroplasty with total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the management of patients with patellofemoral osteoarthritis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 54 consecutive Avon patellofemoral arthroplasties were identified and propensity-score-matched to a group of 54 patients undergoing a TKA with patellar resurfacing for patellofemoral osteoarthritis. The Oxford Knee Score (OKS), the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), and patient satisfaction were collected at a mean follow up of 9.2 years (8 to 15). Survival was defined by revision or intention to revise. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the mean OKS (p > 0.60) or SF-12 scores (p > 0.28) between the groups. There was a lower rate of satisfaction at the final follow-up for the TKA group (78% vs 87%) but this was not statistically significant (odds ratio 0.56, p = 0.21). Length of stay was significantly shorter (p = 0.008) for the Avon group (difference 1.8 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4 to 3.2). The ten-year survival for the Avon group was 92.3% (95% CI 87.1 to 97.5) and for the TKA group was 100% (95% CI 93.8 to 100). This difference was not statistically significant (log-rank test, p = 0.10). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing an Avon patellofemoral arthroplasty have a shorter length of stay, and a functional outcome and rate of satisfaction that is equal to that of TKA. The benefits of the Avon arthroplasty need to be balanced against the increased rate of revision when compared with TKA.

Performance of the CardioChek PA and Cholestech LDX point-of-care analysers compared to clinical diagnostic laboratory methods for the measurement of lipids.

Point-of-care (POC) blood testing is intended to provide results more rapidly than can be obtained from a central laboratory. Precision and accuracy of the CardioChek PA and Cholestech LDX analysers were compared to clinical diagnostic laboratory methods. In 100 patients, total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), HDL cholesterol (HDL-C) and LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were measured by both analysers and compared to those analysed by the National Health Laboratory Service (NHLS) laboratory. Data were evaluated for conformance with National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) guidelines. Results were grouped into low, middle and high ranges and were similar to those obtained by the NHLS, except in the high range where TC and LDL-C levels were under-read by both analysers. All analytes measured by both analysers correlated significantly with NHLS (p < 0.0001). With the exception of LDL-C, both analysers showed reasonable compliance with NCEP goals for coefficients of variation and bias measurements. Both analysers met NCEP guidelines for all analytes at two clinical cut-off points. We concluded that, compared to NHLS methods, performance of the CardioChek PA and Cholestech LDX analysers is acceptable and that they offer healthcare professionals a rapid, POC method for the measurement of lipids.