Decision-making and technique for patellar resurfacing during primary total knee arthroplasty | advanced
Surgical Imaging
The trap: Resecting too little bone or choosing an overly thick button so that composite thickness exceeds native thickness by greater than 2 mm.
The fix: Measure native thickness before resection. Plan resection depth so that bone plus button restores original thickness within 1 mm. Overstuffing increases patellofemoral contact forces, accelerates polyethylene wear, and is a leading cause of persistent anterior knee pain.
Location: The patella must be cut perpendicular to its long axis; the medial and lateral facets must have equal residual bone thickness.
Risk: A thick medial facet and thin lateral facet produces lateral tilt, increases lateral retinacular tension, and leads to maltracking or component loosening. Always check symmetry with callipers after the cut.
Location: Thin native patella (common in small patients or after prior surgery).
Risk: Resurfacing leaves inadequate bone stock (less than 12 mm residual) and markedly raises fracture risk. In these cases selective non-resurfacing or a thin inset button may be safer; document the decision.
Why different: The patellar blood supply enters from the periphery via the prepatellar anastomosis; aggressive medial and lateral releases or thermal damage from saw can devascularise the bone.
Implications: AVN presents as sclerosis and collapse 6-24 months post-operatively; fracture risk is highest when residual thickness is less than 12 mm. Preserve at least one geniculate vessel when possible and avoid excessive peripheral stripping.
Mechanism: A fibrous nodule or synovial proliferation at the superior pole of the patella catches in the intercondylar notch or on the anterior flange of the femoral component during extension from 30-40 degrees of flexion.
Implications: Classic presentation is a painful audible clunk between 30 and 40 degrees of flexion. Prevention: smooth the superior patellar pole, ensure adequate femoral component sizing and rotation, and consider synovial excision at the superior pole.
De Quervain's vs Trigger vs Dupuytren's: Patellar button loosening presents with activity-related pain and a radiolucent line greater than 2 mm on the bone-cement interface. Maltracking produces lateral tilt or subluxation visible on sunrise views and is usually due to component malrotation or asymmetric resection rather than true loosening.
R.E.S.U.R.F.A.C.E.RESURFACE — Decision Framework
T.R.A.C.K.TRACK — Patellar Tracking Assessment
Decision to Resurface — Evidence Overview
Routine versus Selective versus Never Resurfacing
The patellar resurfacing debate centres on whether all primary TKAs should receive a patellar button, whether only selected patients should be resurfaced, or whether the patella should be left unresurfaced in all cases.
Routine resurfacing (resurface every primary TKA):
- Reduces anterior knee pain at 5-10 years in multiple meta-analyses
- Lowers reoperation rate for patellofemoral problems
- Supported by registry trends in Australia, UK and Scandinavia where resurfacing rates exceed 80 percent
Selective resurfacing (resurface when specific criteria met):
- Pre-operative anterior knee pain
- Inflammatory arthritis (rheumatoid, psoriatic)
- Patellar cartilage loss greater than grade 3 or eburnated bone
- Patellar maltracking or tilt on pre-operative imaging
- Patient age less than 60 years or high-demand activity
Never resurfacing (leave all patellae unresurfaced):
- Higher rates of anterior knee pain and secondary resurfacing procedures
- Registry data show reoperation rates for patellofemoral pain are 2-4 times higher when the patella is not resurfaced
- Still practised in some centres with careful patient selection and meticulous technique
Evidence Summary
Meta-analyses consistently show that resurfacing reduces anterior knee pain and reoperation compared with non-resurfacing, but the absolute difference is modest (approximately 5-10 percent absolute risk reduction). Inflammatory arthritis is the clearest indication for resurfacing. In osteoarthritis the decision remains surgeon preference with patient counselling.
Resurfacing versus Non-Resurfacing — Key Outcomes
Key Evidence
Patellar resurfacing versus non-resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis
Patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
The effect of patellar resurfacing on anterior knee pain and function after total knee arthroplasty
Patellar resurfacing in inflammatory arthritis: long-term results
Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry — Annual Report
Clinical Decision Scenarios
Practise clinical reasoning and management decisions out loud
“A 68-year-old woman with rheumatoid arthritis is scheduled for primary TKA. Pre-operative sunrise views show grade 4 patellar cartilage loss. She has moderate anterior knee pain climbing stairs. What is your plan for the patella and why?”
“During primary TKA on a 72-year-old man with osteoarthritis you measure native patellar thickness at 19 mm. After resection the residual bone is 11 mm. What do you do and why?”
“You are performing a primary TKA and after cementing the patellar button the no-thumb test shows persistent lateral tilt throughout the flexion arc. The femoral component is in 3 degrees of external rotation relative to the epicondylar axis and the tibial component is neutral. What is your next step?”