Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2013; 26(05): 333-342
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1333904
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Differences between Midvastus and Subvastus TKA Surgical Approaches in the Tasks of Sitting and Standing

Sarah L. Jarvis
1   Department of Research, The CORE Institute, Sun City West, Arizona
,
Brian R. Onstot
2   Arizona College of Osteopathic Medicine, Midwestern University, Glendale, Arizona
,
Manoshi Bhowmik-Stoker
3   Department of Orthopaedics, Stryker, Mahwah, New Jersey
,
Marc C. Jacofsky
1   Department of Research, The CORE Institute, Sun City West, Arizona
,
David J. Jacofsky
4   Department of Research, The CORE Institute, Phoenix, Arizona
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

20 November 2012

13 December 2012

Publication Date:
13 February 2013 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The mini-midvastus (MV) approach to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) minimizes damage to the extensor mechanism; however, the mini-subvastus (SV) approach is designed to avoid such damage. Quadriceps weakness following TKA can have a significant impact on the activities of daily living, particularly stand-to-sit down (STSD) and sit-to-stand up (STSU) activities. Fifty-three subjects diagnosed with primary osteoarthritis and scheduled to undergo TKA were randomized to receive an MV or SV surgical approach and were given identical postoperative orders. Compared with age-matched controls, the SV group had a quicker return of normal peak knee extension moment during STSU, whereas the MV group had a quicker return of normal movement patterns in hip, knee, and ankle parameters during STSD yet represented the higher functioning subjects as more MV subjects had difficulty completing the task as instructed. Considering both movements are required for daily living, neither surgical group was found to have a significant advantage over the other in functional outcome through 6 months post-TKA.

Keywords

total knee arthroplasty - sit-to-stand - midvastus - subvastus - quadriceps weakness
 

  • References

  • 1 Hatfield GL, Hubley-Kozey CL, Astephen Wilson JL, Dunbar MJ. The effect of total knee arthroplasty on knee joint kinematics and kinetics during gait. J Arthroplasty 2011; 26 (2) 309-318
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Insall J. A midline approach to the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1971; 53 (8) 1584-1586
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Bonutti PM, Zywiel MG, McGrath MS, Mont MA. Surgical techniques for minimally invasive exposures for total knee arthroplasty. Instr Course Lect 2010; 59: 83-91
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Boerger TO, Aglietti P, Mondanelli N, Sensi L. Mini-subvastus versus medial parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; 440: 82-87
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Laskin RS, Beksac B, Phongjunakorn A , et al. Minimally invasive total knee replacement through a mini-midvastus incision: an outcome study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; (428) 74-81
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Schroer WC, Diesfeld PJ, Reedy ME, LeMarr AR. Mini-subvastus approach for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2008; 23 (1) 19-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Scuderi GR, Tenholder M, Capeci C. Surgical approaches in mini-incision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; (428) 61-67
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Bonutti PM, Mont MA, McMahon M, Ragland PS, Kester M. Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86-A (Suppl. 02) 26-32
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Dutton AQ, Yeo SJ, Yang KY, Lo NN, Chia KU, Chong HC. Computer-assisted minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty compared with standard total knee arthroplasty. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90 (1) 2-9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Haas SB, Cook S, Beksac B. Minimally invasive total knee replacement through a mini midvastus approach: a comparative study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; (428) 68-73
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Huang HT, Su JY, Chang JK, Chen CH, Wang GJ. The early clinical outcome of minimally invasive quadriceps-sparing total knee arthroplasty: report of a 2-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22 (7) 1007-1012
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 McAllister CM, Stepanian JD. The impact of minimally invasive surgical techniques on early range of motion after primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2008; 23 (1) 10-18
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Seyler TM, Bonutti PM, Ulrich SD, Fatscher T, Marker DR, Mont MA. Minimally invasive lateral approach to total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22 (7) (Suppl. 03) 21-26
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Tria Jr AJ, Coon TM. Minimal incision total knee arthroplasty: early experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003; (416) 185-190
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Watanabe T, Muneta T, Ishizuki M. Is a minimally invasive approach superior to a conventional approach for total knee arthroplasty? Early outcome and 2- to 4-year follow-up. J Orthop Sci 2009; 14 (5) 589-595
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Aglietti P, Baldini A, Sensi L. Quadriceps-sparing versus mini-subvastus approach in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 452: 106-111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Guy SP, Farndon MA, Conroy JL, Bennett C, Grainger AJ, London NJ. A prospective randomised study of minimally invasive midvastus total knee arthroplasty compared with standard total knee arthroplasty. Knee 2012; 19 (6) 866-871
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Lee DH, Choi J, Nha KW, Kim HJ, Han SB. No difference in early functional outcomes for mini-midvastus and limited medial parapatellar approaches in navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011; 19 (1) 66-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Scuderi GR. Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: surgical technique. Am J Orthop 2006; 35 (7, Suppl) 7-11
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Pagnano MW, Meneghini RM. Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty with an optimized subvastus approach. J Arthroplasty 2006; 21 (4) (Suppl. 01) 22-26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Parentis MA, Rumi MN, Deol GS, Kothari M, Parrish WM, Pellegrini Jr VD. A comparison of the vastus splitting and median parapatellar approaches in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1999; (367) 107-116
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Farquhar SJ, Reisman DS, Snyder-Mackler L. Persistence of altered movement patterns during a sit-to-stand task 1 year following unilateral total knee arthroplasty. Phys Ther 2008; 88 (5) 567-579
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Mizner RL, Snyder-Mackler L. Altered loading during walking and sit-to-stand is affected by quadriceps weakness after total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Res 2005; 23 (5) 1083-1090
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Su FC, Lai KA, Hong WH. Rising from chair after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 1998; 13 (3) 176-181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Kadaba MP, Ramakrishnan HK, Wootten ME. Measurement of lower extremity kinematics during level walking. J Orthop Res 1990; 8 (3) 383-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Kerr KM, White JA, Barr DA, Mollan RAB. Standardization and definitions of the sit-stand-sit movement cycle. Gait Posture 1994; 2: 182
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Tenholder M, Clarke HD, Scuderi GR. Minimal-incision total knee arthroplasty: the early clinical experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; 440: 67-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Hughes MA, Myers BS, Schenkman ML. The role of strength in rising from a chair in the functionally impaired elderly. J Biomech 1996; 29 (12) 1509-1513
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Dehail P, Bestaven E, Muller F , et al. Kinematic and electromyographic analysis of rising from a chair during a “Sit-to-Walk” task in elderly subjects: role of strength. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2007; 22 (10) 1096-1103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Hirschfeld H, Thorsteinsdottir M, Olsson E. Coordinated ground forces exerted by buttocks and feet are adequately programmed for weight transfer during sit-to-stand. J Neurophysiol 1999; 82 (6) 3021-3029
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Riley PO, Schenkman ML, Mann RW, Hodge WA. Mechanics of a constrained chair-rise. J Biomech 1991; 24 (1) 77-85
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Schenkman M, Riley PO, Pieper C. Sit to stand from progressively lower seat heights—alterations in angular velocity. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 1996; 11 (3) 153-158
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Kelley DL, Dainis A, Wood GK. Mechanics and muscular dynamics of rising from a seated position. Biomechanics 1976; 1: 127
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Itokazu M, Uemura S, Aoki T, Takatsu T. Analysis of rising from a chair after total knee arthroplasty. Bull Hosp Jt Dis 1998; 57 (2) 88-92
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Meier W, Mizner RL, Marcus RL, Dibble LE, Peters C, Lastayo PC. Total knee arthroplasty: muscle impairments, functional limitations, and recommended rehabilitation approaches. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2008; 38 (5) 246-256
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar