- Discussion:
- in total knee replacement patients, patellectomy will decrease peak torque generated by the quadriceps by 20-40 %.
- in revising a TKR with a deficient patellar component, there is controversy as to whether a PCL retaining or posterior stabilized prosthesis should be used;
- w/ first generation posterior stabilized components, it was observed that patients who had undergone a patellectomy, there was a significant occurance of AP instability;
- w/ more modern posterior stabilized components, there is increased femoral roll back w/ flexion, increasing efficiency of the lever arm;
- w/ these mechanical advantages, AP instability is enhanced and may be even better than PCL retaining components
- in total knee replacement patients, patellectomy will decrease peak torque generated by the quadriceps by 20-40 %.
- in revising a TKR with a deficient patellar component, there is controversy as to whether a PCL retaining or posterior stabilized prosthesis should be used;
- w/ first generation posterior stabilized components, it was observed that patients who had undergone a patellectomy, there was a significant occurance of AP instability;
- w/ more modern posterior stabilized components, there is increased femoral roll back w/ flexion, increasing efficiency of the lever arm;
- w/ these mechanical advantages, AP instability is enhanced and may be even better than PCL retaining components
Isolated patellar component revision of total knee arthroplasty.