Range-of-Motion Predictors for Repeat Manipulation Under Anesthesia and Revision Surgery for Stiffness After Total Knee Arthroplasty

E. Debbi, Sonia K. Chandi, Agnes D. Cororaton, Joseph T. Nguyen, G. Westrich, P. K. Sculco, Brian P. Chalmers
{"title":"Range-of-Motion Predictors for Repeat Manipulation Under Anesthesia and Revision Surgery for Stiffness After Total Knee Arthroplasty","authors":"E. Debbi, Sonia K. Chandi, Agnes D. Cororaton, Joseph T. Nguyen, G. Westrich, P. K. Sculco, Brian P. Chalmers","doi":"10.1177/15563316241254086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) is a first-line treatment for stiffness after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but predicting outcomes after MUA can be difficult. We sought to determine the association between pre-MUA range-of-motion (ROM) and the risk of repeat MUA and revision in patients who underwent primary TKA. We conducted a retrospective review of 543 MUAs for stiffness at a single institution. Mean age was 62.5 years, and 64% were female. Second MUA or revision TKA were considered failures of treatment. Penalized logistic regression models were used to assess risk factors for failures. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship was used to examine survivorship free from second MUA or revision. Before and after MUA, there was significant improvement in knee flexion (78.0° vs 112.8°, respectively) and extension (4.1° vs 0.8°, respectively); 6.4% of patients required repeat MUA and 5.3% required revision TKA. Survivorship free of second MUA was 90.9%, revision for stiffness was 92.4%, and all-cause revision was 88.2% at 2 years post-MUA. Patients with pre-MUA flexion contracture of ≥5° were more likely to undergo second MUA revision for stiffness and any revision. There were significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes postoperatively. This retrospective chart review suggests that MUA is an effective treatment for post-TKA stiffness, with good early survivorship, and that worse pre-MUA ROM is associated with MUA failure and need for repeat MUA or revision. This information may have implications for patient counseling and management.","PeriodicalId":253125,"journal":{"name":"HSS Journal®: The Musculoskeletal Journal of Hospital for Special Surgery","volume":"95 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HSS Journal®: The Musculoskeletal Journal of Hospital for Special Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15563316241254086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) is a first-line treatment for stiffness after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but predicting outcomes after MUA can be difficult. We sought to determine the association between pre-MUA range-of-motion (ROM) and the risk of repeat MUA and revision in patients who underwent primary TKA. We conducted a retrospective review of 543 MUAs for stiffness at a single institution. Mean age was 62.5 years, and 64% were female. Second MUA or revision TKA were considered failures of treatment. Penalized logistic regression models were used to assess risk factors for failures. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship was used to examine survivorship free from second MUA or revision. Before and after MUA, there was significant improvement in knee flexion (78.0° vs 112.8°, respectively) and extension (4.1° vs 0.8°, respectively); 6.4% of patients required repeat MUA and 5.3% required revision TKA. Survivorship free of second MUA was 90.9%, revision for stiffness was 92.4%, and all-cause revision was 88.2% at 2 years post-MUA. Patients with pre-MUA flexion contracture of ≥5° were more likely to undergo second MUA revision for stiffness and any revision. There were significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes postoperatively. This retrospective chart review suggests that MUA is an effective treatment for post-TKA stiffness, with good early survivorship, and that worse pre-MUA ROM is associated with MUA failure and need for repeat MUA or revision. This information may have implications for patient counseling and management.
全膝关节置换术后因僵硬而进行麻醉下重复操作和翻修手术的活动范围预测因子
麻醉下手法复位(MUA)是治疗全膝关节置换术(TKA)术后僵硬的一线疗法,但要预测麻醉下手法复位后的效果却很困难。我们试图确定在接受初级 TKA 的患者中,MUA 前的活动范围 (ROM) 与重复 MUA 和翻修风险之间的关系。我们对一家机构的 543 例 MUA 的僵硬程度进行了回顾性分析。平均年龄为 62.5 岁,64% 为女性。第二次MUA或翻修TKA被视为治疗失败。采用惩罚性逻辑回归模型评估失败的风险因素。Kaplan-Meier生存率被用来检测无二次MUA或翻修的生存率。MUA前后,膝关节屈曲(分别为78.0° vs 112.8°)和伸展(分别为4.1° vs 0.8°)均有显著改善;6.4%的患者需要重复MUA,5.3%的患者需要翻修TKA。在MUA术后2年,无二次MUA的存活率为90.9%,因僵硬而进行翻修的存活率为92.4%,因各种原因进行翻修的存活率为88.2%。MUA前屈曲挛缩≥5°的患者更有可能因僵硬而进行第二次MUA翻修或任何翻修。术后患者报告的结果有明显改善。这项回顾性病历审查表明,MUA是治疗TKA术后僵硬的有效方法,早期存活率高,而MUA术前ROM较差与MUA失败和需要重复MUA或翻修有关。这些信息可能会对患者咨询和管理产生影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信