A prospective randomised study of minimally invasive midvastus total knee arthroplasty compared with standard total knee arthroplasty

IntroductionProposed advantages of minimally invasive surgery include shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and a greater range of motion but potential concerns are raised about both prolonged learning curves and a compromise in exposure leading to implant malposition.Patients and methodsThis powered study evaluates the outcomes of 80 patients randomised to have mini-midvastus (MMV) approach or standard medial parapatellar (MPP) approach. Rehabilitation protocols and discharge criteria were standardised. Patients were discharged home directly, capable of safe independent care. Validated outcome measures were recorded post-operatively at intervals up to 1 year. Independent, blinded review of post-operative x-rays was obtained.ResultsLength of stay was similar in the MMV and MPP groups (median 3.73 days vs. 3.75 days). No statistically significant differences were detected in either the demographic data or any intra-operative variable apart from blood loss and incision length. No statistically significant difference in clinical outcome measures (Oxford/Knee Society Scores) or radiographic analysis was observed.ConclusionThe MMV approach does not appear to confer any clinically significant benefit apart from a smaller surgical scar, compared to the MPP surgical technique.Level of evidence I: randomised control trial.R.E.C. 040301.