Assessment of clinical, functional and radiological outcomes in young patients with grade 3 and 4 osteoarthritis of the knee joint undergoing knee joint distraction with and without arthroscopic debridement and chondroplasty-a prospective, comparative and randomized controlled study

Authors

  • Dinesh Gupta Department of Orthopaedics, Bharatratna Doctor Babasaheb Ambedkar Municipal Hospital, Kandivali, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
  • Rohit N. Garg Department of Orthopaedics, Bharatratna Doctor Babasaheb Ambedkar Municipal Hospital, Kandivali, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
  • Amey Ashok Adate Department of Orthopaedics, HBT Medical College and Dr. R N Cooper Municipal General Hospital, Juhu, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20240409

Keywords:

KJD, Arthroscopic debridement and chondroplasty, TKA, VAS, WOMAC, JSW, Kellegren Lawrence

Abstract

Background: Treatment of severe osteoarthritis (OA) in relatively young patients is challenging. Although successful, Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has a limited lifespan, with the risk of revision surgery, especially in active young patients. Our study aims to assess the comparative clinical, functional and radiological outcomes of knee joint distraction (KJD) with and without arthroscopic debridement and chondroplasty in OA of knee in the young, in a randomized controlled trial.

Methods: Our study was a prospective randomized trial with equal allocation. A total of 160 patients needing intervention for knee arthritis, in the age group of <55 years were included as per the inclusion criteria, and were randomized into 2 groups. Group A included 80 patients who underwent KJD alone. Group B included 80 patients who underwent KJD with arthroscopic debridement and chondroplasty. All patients were followed up to 24 months post intervention. Clinical (Visual analogue scale-VAS), functional (Western Ontario and McMaster universities OA index-WOMAC) and radiological (Joint space width-JSW) outcomes were then compared and assessed.

Results: Both the groups showed statistically significant improvement of clinical, functional and radiological outcome scores compared to baseline levels. The mean improvement in KJD+SCOPY group was statistically superior to that of KJD group with regard to clinical and functional outcome scores; however, the radiological improvement though being statistically significant in both groups compared to baseline levels, but one group was not superior to that of other.

Conclusions: KJD in patients with OA of knee (Kellegren Lawrence grade 3-4) aged <55 years results in improvement of clinical, functional and radiological parameters at 2 year follow up. Addition of arthroscopic debridement and chondroplasty to KJD makes it superior to KJD alone in terms of improvement in clinical, functional and radiological outcomes. We recommend arthroscopic debridement and chondroplasty coupled with KJD for compliant patients of less than 55 years with grade 3-4 OA of the knee.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Wylde V, Hewlett S, Learmonth ID, Dieppe P. Persistent pain after joint replacement: prevalence, sensory qualities, and postoperative determinants. PAIN®. 2011;152(3):566-72.

Australian Orthopaedic Association. National Joint Replacement Registry, Hip and knee arthroplasty: annual report 2010. Available at: https://aoanjrr.sahmri.com/presentations-2010. Accessed on 1 December. 2023.

Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Zhao K, Kelly M, Bozic KJ. Future young patient demand for primary and revision joint replacement: national projections from 2010 to 2030. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 2009;467(10):2606-12.

Brinkman JM, Lobenhoffer P, Agneskirchner JD, Staubli AE, Wymenga AB, Van Heerwaarden RJ. Osteotomies around the knee: patient selection, stability of fixation and bone healing in high tibial osteotomies. J Bone Joint Surg Bri. 2008;90(12):1548-57.

Katz J, Brownlee S, Jones M. The role of arthroscopy in the management of knee osteoarthritis. Best Practice Res Clin Rheumatol. 2014;28(1):143-56.

Finnikin S. Arthroscopic surgery for knee pain: where is the shared decision making? BMJ. 2016;i4388.

Intema F, Van Roermund P, Marijnissen A, Cotofana S, Eckstein F, Castelein R et al. Tissue structure modification in knee osteoarthritis by use of joint distraction: an open 1- year pilot study. Ann Rheumatic Dis. 2011;70(8):1441-6.

Wiegant K, Van Roermund PM, Intema F, Cotofana S, Eckstein F, Mastbergen SC et al. Sustained clinical and structural benefit after joint distraction in the treatment of severe knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthrit Cartilage. 2013;21(11):1660-7.

Van der Woude JT, Wiegant K, Van Roermund PM, Intema F, Custers RJ, Eckstein F et al. Five-year follow-up of knee joint distraction: clinical benefit and cartilaginous tissue repair in an open uncontrolled prospective study. Cartilage. 2017;8(3):263-71.

van der Woude J, Wiegant K, van Heerwaarden R, Spruijt S, Emans P, Mastbergen S et al. Knee joint distraction compared with total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J. 2017;99-B(1):51-58.

Flouzat-Lachaniette CH, Roubineau F, Heyberger C, Bouthors C. Distraction to treat knee osteoarthritis. Joint Bone Spine. 2017;84(2):141-4.

Takahashi T, Baboolal TG, Lamb J, Hamilton TW, Pandit HG. Is Knee Joint Distraction a Viable Treatment Option for Knee OA? A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis. J Knee Surg. 2018;32(8):788-95.

Van der Woude J, van Heerwaarden R, Spruijt S, Eckstein F, Maschek S, van Roermund P et al. Six weeks of continuous joint distraction appears sufficient for clinical benefit and cartilaginous tissue repair in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. The Knee. 2016;23(5):785-91.

Dong P, Tang X, Wang J, Jiang Y, Yao W, Gui J. Short-term effectiveness of joint distraction by Ilizarov combined with arthroscopic debridement in treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Chin J Reparat Reconstruct Surg. 2017;31(7):794.

Jansen MP, van der Weiden GS, Van Roermund PM, Custers RJ, Mastbergen SC, Lafeber FP. Initial tissue repair predicts long-term clinical success of knee joint distraction as treatment for knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthrit Cartilage. 2018;26(12):1604-8.

Gaonkar K, Gaonkar N, Gupta K, Patel N, Kulkarni H. Role of arthroscopy in osteoarthritis of the knee joint. Int J Clin Trials. 2015;2:38.

Takahashi T, Baboolal TG, Lamb J, Hamilton TW, Pandit HG. Is knee joint distraction a viable treatment option for knee OA?-a literature review and meta-analysis. J Knee Surg. 2018;32(08).

Law GW, Lee JK, Soong J, Lim JWS, Zhang KT, Tan AHC. Arthroscopic debridement of thedegenerative knee-Is there still a role? Asia-Pacific J Sports Med Arthroscopy Rehabilit Technol. 2019;15:23-8.

Goh EL, Lou WCN, Chidambaram S, Ma S. The role of joint distraction in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and quantitative analysis. Orthop Res Rev. 2019;11:79.

Downloads

Published

2024-02-26

How to Cite

Gupta, D., Garg, R. N., & Adate, A. A. (2024). Assessment of clinical, functional and radiological outcomes in young patients with grade 3 and 4 osteoarthritis of the knee joint undergoing knee joint distraction with and without arthroscopic debridement and chondroplasty-a prospective, comparative and randomized controlled study. International Journal of Research in Orthopaedics, 10(2), 240–247. https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20240409

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles