Common controversies in total knee replacement surgery: Current evidence

Table 5 Patellar eversion vs subluxation

Ref.	Type of study	Outcome
Umrani et al[52]	Prospective randomized trial. Patellar eversion or not (mid-vastus approach)	No statistical differences between 2 groups throughout the follow-up periods in recovery of quadriceps force or power and clinical data
Arnout et al[51]	Prospective randomized study. Medial parapatellar arthrotomy with patellar eversion vs same approach without eversion	Patellar dislocation without eversion improved range of motion at 1 yr postoperatively. All other studied parameters were not significantly different
Dalury et al[50]	Prospective randomized trial. Patellar eversion and anterior tibial translation vs patellar subluxation and no tibial translation	No significant differences between the treatment groups at 6 wk, 12 wk or 6 mo after surgery
Walter et al[49]	Prospective, randomized, blinded study. Mid-vastus split with or without patellar eversion vs median parapatellar arthrotomy or a mid-vastus split both without patellar eversion	Significantly earlier return of straight leg raise was noted when patellar eversion was avoided
Reid et al[53]	Prospective randomized double-blinded study. Patients undergoing TKA through a standard medial parapatellar approach assigned to either retraction or eversion of the patella groups	No significant clinical differences in the early to medium term. With patella retraction, there may be an increased risk of damage to the patellar tendon and increased risk in implant malpositioning