header advert
You currently have no access to view or download this content. Please log in with your institutional or personal account if you should have access to through either of these
The Bone & Joint Journal Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from The Bone & Joint Journal

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Get Access locked padlock

Knee

Knee manipulation under anaesthetic following total knee arthroplasty

a matched cohort design



Download PDF

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) after manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) for post-operative stiffness with a matched cohort of TKA patients who did not requre MUA.

In total 72 patients (mean age 59.8 years, 42 to 83) who underwent MUA following TKA were identified from our prospective database and compared with a matched cohort of patients who had undergone TKA without subsequent MUA. Patients were evaluated for range of movement (ROM) and clinical outcome scores (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index, Short-Form Health Survey, and Knee Society Clinical Rating System) at a mean follow-up of 36.4 months (12 to 120). MUA took place at a mean of nine weeks (5 to 18) after TKA. In patients who required MUA, mean flexion deformity improved from 10° (0° to 25°) to 4.4° (0° to 15°) (p < 0.001), and mean range of flexion improved from 79.8° (65° to 95°) to 116° (80° to 130°) (p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in ROM or functional outcome scores at three months, one year, or two years between those who required MUA and those who did not. There were no complications associated with manipulation.

At most recent follow-up, patients requiring MUA achieved equivalent ROM and clinical outcome scores when compared with a matched control group. While other studies have focused on ROM after manipulation, the current study adds to current literature by supplementing this with functional outcome scores.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1640–4.


Correspondence should be sent to Dr E. M. Vasarhelyi; e-mail:

For access options please click here