Minimally invasive surgery did not improve outcome compared to conventional surgery following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty when using local infiltration analgesia

• Background and purpose: There has recently been focus on the advantages of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) over conventional surgery and on local infiltration analgesia (LIA) during knee arthroplasty. This prospective randomized controlled trial investigated whether MIS would result in earlier home readiness and reduced postoperative pain compared to conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) where both groups received LIA. Patients and methods: 40 patients scheduled for UKA were randomized to group MIS or group CON (conventional surgery). Both groups received LIA, with a mixture of ropivacaine, ketorolac, and epinephrine, intra- and postoperatively. The primary endpoint was home readiness (time to fulfillment of discharge criteria). The patients were followed for 6 months. Results: We found no statistically significant difference in home readiness between group MIS, median (range) 24 (21–71) h compared to group CON, 24 (21–46) h. No statistically significant differences between the groups were found in the secondary endpoints: pain intensity, morphine consumption, knee function, hospital stay, patient satisfaction, Oxford Knee Score and EQ-5D. The side effects between the groups were also similar, except a higher incidence of nausea on the second postoperative day in group MIS compared with group CON. Interpretation: Minimally invasive surgery did not improve outcome after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared to conventional surgery, when both groups received local infiltration analgesia. The surgical approach (MIS or conventional surgery) should be selected according to surgeon’s preferences and local hospital policies. ClinicalTrials.gov. (Identifier NCT00991445). 

Nyckelord

Medicin

Medicine

Publikations- och innehållstyp

vet (ämneskategori)

ovr (ämneskategori)