Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 24, 2026
The Use of Mixed Reality in Custom-Made Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A First Case Report
Published on: August 4, 2022
Patellofemoral arthroplasty, where are we today?
Sébastien Lustig1, Robert A Magnussen, Diane L Dahm
1Sydney Orthopaedic Research Institute, Suite 12, Level 1, 445 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood, NSW, 2067, Australia. sebastien.lustig@gmail.com
Purpose:
Patellofemoral arthroplasty remains controversial, primarily due to the high failure rates reported with early implants. Numerous case series have been published over the years detailing results of various first- and second-generation implants. The purpose of this work is to summarize results published to date and identify common themes regarding implants, surgical techniques, and indications in order to maximize results of future procedures.
Methods:
A comprehensive review of the MEDLINE database was carried out to identify all clinical studies related to patellofemoral arthroplasty.
Results:
First-generation resurfacing implants were associated with relatively high failure rates in the medium term. Second-generation implants, with femoral cuts based on TKA designs have yielded more promising medium-term results. Surgical indications are specific and must be carefully followed to minimize poor results. Short-term complications are generally related to patellar maltracking, while long-term complications are generally related to progression of osteoarthritis in the tibiofemoral joint. Implant loosening and polyethylene wear are rarely reported. Short-term results are favourable for new technology including custom implants and computer navigated surgery.
Conclusions:
Overall, recent improvements in implant design and surgical techniques have resulted in improvements in short- and medium-term results. More work is required to assess the long-term outcomes of modern implant designs.
Level Of Evidence:
IV.
