New concept of orthosis treatment for knee osteoarthritis: Clinical and radiological outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Given the increasing numbers of young patients with knee osteoarthritis there is a need for treatments that can postpone a joint prosthesis (total knee replacement). OBJECTIVE: As an alternative to the effective yet invasive knee joint distraction procedure, a knee orthosis was developed aiming to unload the affected knee and improving synovial fluid flow. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of using a load-reducing orthosis for two months on functioning, pain, and disease progression (e.g. amount of damaged cartilage) in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee for at least one year. METHODS: This is an interventional single-center pilot study. Ten patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of one knee (5 males/5 females; median age 57; age range 42-59) used a custom-made orthosis for 60 days during daily life activities that involved knee loading (e.g. standing, walking, but not during stair climbing). Cycling was not allowed. Clinical outcomes were assessed up to 24 months after intervention at 6 timepoints using patient reported-outcome measures Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) range 0-100; Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), range 0-100 for pain. Minimum joint space width (mJSW) was assessed using knee images digital analysis (KIDA) and articular cartilage volume with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using custom software at baseline and at 12 and 24 months follow-up. RESULTS: Clinically beneficial effects were found for functioning (WOMAC improvement compared to baseline ranged between 18 points at 3 months follow-up and 31 points at 12 months follow-up, with only the 24-months follow-up (improvement of 27 points) not reaching statistical significance (p< 0.05)) and for pain (VAS improvement compared to baseline at follow-up time points ranged between 41-56 points; all p< 0.05). No improvements in mJSW- or MRI-derived parameters were found. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that use of a custom-made knee-unloading orthosis for 60 days can result in improved functional ability and decrease in pain in relatively young patients with knee osteoarthritis. No effect on disease progression could be evidenced.

Joint line obliquity after lateral closing-wedge high tibial osteotomy does not adversely affect clinical and radiological outcome: a 5-year follow-up study.

PURPOSE: To analyze the association between change in knee joint line obliquity (KJLO) and patient-reported outcome, radiological progression of osteoarthritis, and surgical survival after lateral closing-wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTO). METHODS: A cohort of 180 patients treated in one single hospital with lateral closing-wedge HTO was examined. KJLO was defined by the medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA). To assess the association between KJLO and patient-reported outcome, radiological progression of osteoarthritis, and surgical survival, patient groups were defined: I, postoperative MPTA < 95.0°; II, postoperative MPTA ≥ 95.0°; A, MPTA change < 8.0°; B, MPTA change ≥ 8.0°. Propensity score matching was used for between-groups (I and II, A and B) covariates matching, including age, gender, preoperative lower limb alignment, preoperative medial joint space width (mJSW), preoperative Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, wedge size, and postoperative follow-up time. Patient-reported outcome was assessed by the WOMAC questionnaire, radiological progression of osteoarthritis by mJSW and Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade progression (≥ 1) preoperatively and at follow-ups (> 2 years). Failure was defined as revision HTO or conversion to knee arthroplasty. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, groups I and II contained 58 pairs of patients and groups A and B contained 50 pairs. There were no significant differences in postoperative WOMAC score or surgical failure rate between groups I and II or between groups A and B (p > 0.05). However, the postoperative mJSW was significantly lower in group I than group II (3.2 ± 1.6 mm vs 3.9 ± 1.8 mm; p = 0.018) and in group A than group B (3.0 ± 1.7 mm vs 3.7 ± 1.5 mm; p = 0.040). KL grade progression rate was significantly higher in group I than group II (53.4% vs 29.3%; p = 0.008) and in group A than group B (56.0% vs 28.0%; p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Increased KJLO (postoperative MPTA ≥ 95.0°) or MPTA change ≥ 8.0° after lateral closing-wedge HTO does not adversely affect patient-reported outcome, radiological progression of osteoarthritis, or surgical survival at an average 5-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective cohort study.

Joint distraction using a purpose-built device for knee osteoarthritis: a prospective 2-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: Knee distraction treatment for end-stage osteoarthritis successfully postpones arthroplasty for years. Studies performed thus far used general intended use, patient-personalised or custom-made devices. In this study, for the first time, a device specifically designed for knee distraction is evaluated. DESIGN: 65 patients (≤65 years) with end-stage knee osteoarthritis indicated for arthroplasty received knee distraction. Before, 1-year and 2-year post-treatment, questionnaires were filled out and knee radiographs made. Adverse events and self-reported pain medication were registered. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients completed 2-year follow-up: one patient did not complete treatment, three patients received arthroplasty in the first and four patients in the second year follow-up. Eight patients were lost to follow-up in the second year. The total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score showed a clinically relevant improvement at 1 and 2 years (+26 and +24 points), as did all subscales (all p<0.001). The minimum radiographic joint space width improved over 1 (+0.5 mm; p<0.001) and 2 (+0.4 mm; p=0.015) years, as did the physical Short-Form 36 (+10 points; p<0.001). The most common adverse event was pin tract infection, experienced by 66% of patients, in 88% successfully treated with oral antibiotics. In two cases, hospitalisation and/or intravenous antibiotics were needed. Eight patients experienced device-related complications. None of the complications influenced 2-year outcomes. Before treatment, 42% of patients used pain medication, which had nearly been halved 1 (23%; p=0.02) and 2 years (29%; p=0.27) post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with a general applicable, for knee distraction purpose-built device showed, despite adverse events, significant clinical and structural improvement over 2 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL7986.

Knee Joint Distraction as Treatment for Osteoarthritis Results in Clinical and Structural Benefit: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Limited Number of Studies and Patients Available.

OBJECTIVE: Knee joint distraction (KJD) is a joint-preserving osteoarthritis treatment that may postpone a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in younger patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates short- and long-term clinical benefit and tissue structure changes after KJD. DESIGN: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched for eligible clinical studies evaluating at least one of the primary parameters: WOMAC, VAS-pain, KOOS, EQ5D, radiographic joint space width or MRI cartilage thickness after KJD. Random effects models were applied on all outcome parameters and outcomes were compared with control groups found in the included studies. RESULTS: Eleven articles reporting on 7 different KJD cohorts with in total 127 patients and 5 control groups with multiple follow-up moments were included, of which 2 were randomized controlled trials. Significant improvements in all primary parameters were found and benefit lasted up to at least 9 years. Overall, outcomes were comparable with control groups, including high tibial osteotomy, although TKA showed better clinical response. CONCLUSIONS: Current, still limited, evidence shows KJD causes clear benefit in clinical and structural parameters, both short- and long-term. Longer follow-up with more patients is necessary, to validate outcome and to potentially improve patient selection for this intensive treatment. Thus far, for younger knee osteoarthritis patients, KJD may be an option to consider.

Popliteal Skin Lesion due to Wear Disease in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Case Report.

CASE: An 87-year-old woman presented with a popliteal skin lesion due to polyethylene wear 13 years following a left total knee arthroplasty. Excisional biopsy through a posterior approach was performed. Histology showed inflammation with granulomas and birefringent foreign body particles in the skin. Cultures remained negative, and revision knee arthroplasty was performed. CONCLUSIONS: A popliteal skin lesion due to polyethylene wear disease in total knee arthroplasty has not previously been described. Patients with an atypical inflammation of the skin with an underlying joint implant should be referred to an orthopaedic surgeon, and dermal biopsies should be checked for birefringent material. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

Osteotomy for treating knee osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with unicompartmental osteoarthritis of the knee can be treated with an osteotomy. The goal of an osteotomy is to unload the diseased compartment of the knee. This is the second update of the original review published in The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2005. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of an osteotomy for treating patients with knee osteoarthritis, including the following main outcomes scores: treatment failure, pain and function scores, health-related quality of life, serious adverse events, mortality and reoperation rate. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE (Current Contents, HealthSTAR) were searched until November 2013 for this second update. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and controlled clinical trials comparing an osteotomy with other treatments for patients with unicompartmental osteoarthritis of the knee. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the domains recommended in the 'Risk of bias' tool of The Cochrane Collaboration. The quality of the results was analysed by performing overall grading of evidence by outcome using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. MAIN RESULTS: Eight new studies were included in this update, for a total of 21 included studies involving 1065 people.In four studies, the randomised sequence was adequately generated and clearly described. In eight studies, allocation concealment was adequately generated and described. In four studies, the blinding procedures were sufficient. In six studies, incomplete outcome data were not adequately addressed. Furthermore, in 11 studies, the selective outcome reporting item was unclear because no study protocol was provided.Follow-up of studies comparing different osteotomy techniques was too short to measure treatment failure, which implicates revision to a knee arthroplasty.Four studies evaluated a closing wedge high tibial osteotomy (CW-HTO) with another high tibial osteotomy (aHTO). Based on these studies, the CW-HTO group had 1.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) -7.7% to 4.2%; low-quality evidence) more pain compared with the aHTO group; this finding was not statistically significant. Pooled function in the CW-HTO group was 0.5% (95% CI -3.8% to 2.8%; low-quality evidence) higher compared with the aHTO group; this finding was not statistically significant. No data on health-related quality of life and mortality were presented.Serious adverse events were reported in only four studies and were not significantly different (low-quality evidence) between groups. The reoperation rate were scored as early hardware removal because of pain and pin track infection due to the external fixator. Risk of reoperation was 2.6 (95% CI 1.5 to 4.5; low-quality evidence) times higher in the aHTO group compared with the CW-HTO group, and this finding was statistically significant.The quality of evidence for most outcomes comparing different osteotomy techniques was downgraded to low because of the numbers of available studies, the numbers of participants and limitations in design.Two studies compared high tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental knee replacement. Treatment failure and pain and function scores were not different between groups after a mean follow-up of 7.5 years. The osteotomy group reported more adverse events when compared with the unicompartmental knee replacement group, but the difference was not statistically significant. No data on health-related quality of life and mortality were presented.No study compared an osteotomy versus conservative treatment.Ten included studies compared differences in perioperative or postoperative conditions after high tibial osteotomy. In most of these studies, no statistically significant differences in outcomes were noted between groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The conclusion of this update did not change: Valgus high tibial osteotomy reduces pain and improves knee function in patients with medial compartmental osteoarthritis of the knee. However, this conclusion is based on within-group comparisons, not on non-operative controls. No evidence suggests differences between different osteotomy techniques. No evidence shows whether an osteotomy is more effective than alternative surgical treatment such as unicompartmental knee replacement or non-operative treatment. So far, the results of this updated review do not justify a conclusion on benefit of specific high tibial osteotomy technique for knee osteoarthritis.

High tibial osteotomy: closed wedge versus combined wedge osteotomy.

BACKGROUND: High tibial osteotomy is a common procedure to treat symptomatic osteoarthritis of the medial compartment of the knee with varus alignment. This is achieved by overcorrecting the varus alignment to 2-6° of valgus. Various high tibial osteotomy techniques are currently used to this end. Common procedures are medial opening wedge and lateral closing wedge tibial osteotomies. The lateral closing wedge technique is a primary stable correction with a high rate of consolidation, but has the disadvantage of bone loss and change in tibial condylar offset. The medial opening wedge technique does not result in any bone loss but needs to be fixated with a plate and may cause tibial slope and medial collateral ligament tightening. A relatively new technique, the combined valgus high tibial osteotomy, claims to include the advantages of both techniques without bone loss. Aim of this prospective randomized trial is to compare the lateral closing wedge with the combined wedge osteotomy in patients with symptomatic varus osteoarthritis of the knee. METHODS/DESIGN: A group of 110 patients with osteoarthritis of the medial compartment of the knee with 6-12° varus malalignment over 18 years of age are recruited to participate a randomized controlled trial. Patients are randomized to undergo a high tibial osteotomy, with either a lateral closing wedge technique or a combined wedge osteotomy technique. Primary outcome measure is achievement of an overcorrection of 4° valgus after one year of surgery, assessed by measuring the hip-knee-ankle angle. Secondary objectives are radiological scores and anatomical changes after high tibial osteotomy; pain, functional scores and quality of life will also be compared. DISCUSSION: Combined high tibial osteotomy modification avoids metaphyseal tibial bone loss, decreasing transposition of the tibial condyle and shortening of the patellar tendon after osteotomy, even in case of great correction. The clinical results of the combined wedge osteotomy technique are very promising. Hypothesis is that the combined wedge osteotomy technique will achieve more accurate overcorrection of varus malalignment with fewer anatomical changes of the proximal tibia after one year. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Registry (Netherlands trial register): NTR3898.

Long-term follow-up of anatomic graduated component total knee arthroplasty: a 15- to 20-year survival analysis.

The aims of this study were to determine survival rate, the clinical performance, and radiologic results of an Anatomic Graduated Component (AGC) total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Survival analysis was assessed by analyzing all hospital records of 211 AGC TKAs in 177 patients after 15 to 20 years. The survival rate was 87%, with failure defined as revision for any reason including infection. The main reasons for failure were infection and failure of the metal-backed patellar component. Clinical evaluation of 30 patients (33 TKAs) and questionnaires of 20 patients (23 TKAs) were taken, showing moderate to good results (mean Knee Society Score, 51; mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index, 82; mean University of California Los Angeles score, 4). Radiologic evaluation of 13 TKAs in 12 patients showed that none was suspect for loosening. Three knees showed significant medial wear but no clinical complaints. In conclusion, this is one of the first studies showing that AGC total knee prosthesis has good results 15 to 20 years after surgery.