The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 80:926-7 (1998)
© 1998 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
Correspondence
A. Mazhar Tokgözo lu, M.D.,
Robert L. Barrack, M.D.,
Michael W. Wolfe, M.D.,
Alexander J. Bertot, M.D.,
Douglas A. Waldman, M.D.,
Matko Milicic, M.D. and
Leann Myers, Ph.D.
TO THE EDITOR:
Barrack et al., in their excellent article "Resurfacing of the Patella in Total Knee Arthroplasty. A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study" (79-A: 11211131, Aug. 1997), addressed an important and controversial issue. This study demonstrated not only that patellar resurfacing is effective for patients who have controversial indications but also that the subject is still open for discussion. Perhaps when an implant with a more anatomical patellofemoral groove is used, as the Miller-Galante II total knee prosthesis was in this study, resurfacing of the patella is not necessary. However, when an implant designed for replacement of the patellofemoral surface is used, these results may be more difficult to achieve.
Several years ago, my colleagues and I tried to initiate a similar study in which patients who were to have a total knee arthroplasty with the Miller-Galante II prosthesis were consecutively assigned to management with either resurfacing or retention of . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Technorati What's this?
|