Display options
Cite
Ebisz M, Mostowy M, Góralczyk A, et al. Both arthroscopic and open posterior knee capsulotomy are effective in terms of extension recovery and functional improvement-systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021;doi: 10.1007/s00167-021-06634-4.
Ebisz, M., Mostowy, M., Góralczyk, A., Hirschmann, M. T., Skowronek, P., LaPrade, R. F., & Malinowski, K. (2021). Both arthroscopic and open posterior knee capsulotomy are effective in terms of extension recovery and functional improvement-systematic review. Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, . https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06634-4
Ebisz, Michał, et al. "Both arthroscopic and open posterior knee capsulotomy are effective in terms of extension recovery and functional improvement-systematic review." Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA vol. (2021). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06634-4
Ebisz M, Mostowy M, Góralczyk A, Hirschmann MT, Skowronek P, LaPrade RF, Malinowski K. Both arthroscopic and open posterior knee capsulotomy are effective in terms of extension recovery and functional improvement-systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021 Jun 12; doi: 10.1007/s00167-021-06634-4. Epub 2021 Jun 12. PMID: 34117895.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021 Jun 12; doi: 10.1007/s00167-021-06634-4. Epub 2021 Jun 12.

Both arthroscopic and open posterior knee capsulotomy are effective in terms of extension recovery and functional improvement-systematic review.

Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA

Michał Ebisz, Marcin Mostowy, Adrian Góralczyk, Michael T Hirschmann, Paweł Skowronek, Robert F LaPrade, Konrad Malinowski

Affiliations

  1. Artromedical Orthopaedic Clinic, Antracytowa 1, 97-400, Belchatow, Poland.
  2. Orthopedic and Trauma Department, Veteran's Memorial Teaching Hospital in Lodz, Medical University of Lodz, Zeromskiego 113, 90-549, Lodz, Poland.
  3. ORTIM Orthopaedic Clinic, Mlynowa 17, 15-568, Bialystok, Poland.
  4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Kantonsspital Baselland (Bruderholz, Liestal, Laufen), CH-4101, Bruderholz, Switzerland.
  5. University of Basel, CH-4051, Basel, Switzerland.
  6. Department of Orthopaedic, Trauma Surgery S. Zeromski Hospital, Os. Na Skarpie 66, 31-913, Krakow, Poland.
  7. Twin Cities Orthopedics, 4010 W 65th St Edina, Minnesota, 55435, USA.
  8. Artromedical Orthopaedic Clinic, Antracytowa 1, 97-400, Belchatow, Poland. [email protected].

PMID: 34117895 DOI: 10.1007/s00167-021-06634-4

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the recovery of extension and improvement in functional scores after an arthroscopic or open posterior knee capsulotomy in the setting of an extension deficit.

METHODS: A systematic search of articles published between 1980 and 2020 was performed in the MEDLINE/PubMed database, EMBASE/Ovid database and Web of Science database. The inclusion criteria consisted of patients with primary extension deficits > 5° who underwent an arthroscopic or open posterior knee capsulotomy. The assessed outcomes were preoperative and postoperative range of motion and functional outcome scores. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and case series with a follow-up longer than 6 months were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool for case series. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS: Of 226 records identified through database searching, 7 studies were included in the final analysis. The outcomes of 107 patients with a mean age of 34.1 (range 15-63) years were available. In all the included studies, a posterior capsulotomy resulted in the restoration of knee extension to normal or nearly normal values (mean postoperative extension deficit: 0.4-4.2 degrees) with a significant increase in functional outcome scores. No neurovascular complications were reported within the studies. Due to the diverse methodology of studies, the direct comparison of arthroscopic versus open approaches was not possible. Concerning the risk of bias assessment, the greatest concerns raised the selection of participants among the included studies and the methods of outcome measurement. The certainty of evidence was very low according to the GRADE.

CONCLUSIONS: Both arthroscopic and open posterior capsulotomy of the knee results in restoration of normal or nearly normal knee extension and significant improvement in functional outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Keywords: Arthroscopy; Capsule release; Capsulotomy; Extension deficit; Flexion contracture; Knee

References

  1. Behrend H, Hertel P (2003) Results of the surgical treatment of arthrofibrosis of the knee. Unfallchirurg 106(6):483–491 - PubMed
  2. Campbell TM, Trudel G (2020) Knee flexion contracture associated with a contracture and worse function of the contralateral knee: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 101(4):624–632 - PubMed
  3. Campbell TM, Trudel G, Laneuville O (2015) Knee flexion contractures in patients with osteoarthritis: clinical features and histologic characterization of the posterior capsule. PMR 7(5):466–473 - PubMed
  4. Ebisz M, Mostowy M, Góralczyk A, LaPrade RF, Malinowski K (2021) The influence of arthroscopic versus open posterior knee capsulotomy on range of motion recovery and functional performance: systematic review protocol. Mendeley Data. https://doi.org/10.17632/nj8dmhz7h9.2 - PubMed
  5. Ekhtiari S, Horner NS, de Sa D et al (2017) Arthrofibrosis after ACL reconstruction is best treated in a step-wise approach with early recognition and intervention: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(12):3929–3937 - PubMed
  6. Freiling D, Lobenhoffer P (2009) The surgical treatment of chronic extension deficits of the knee. Oper Orthop Traumatol 21(6):545–556 - PubMed
  7. Gittings D, Hesketh P, Dattilo J, Zgonis M, Kelly J, Mehta S (2016) Arthroscopic lysis of adhesions improves knee range of motion after fixation of intra-articular fractures about the knee. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136(12):1631–1635 - PubMed
  8. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R et al (2011) GRADE guidelines 6 Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol 64(12):1283–1293 - PubMed
  9. Harato K, Nagura T, Matsumoto H, Otani T, Toyama Y, Suda Y (2008) Knee flexion contracture will lead to mechanical overload in both limbs: a simulation study using gait analysis. Knee 15(6):467–472 - PubMed
  10. Kim YM, Joo YB (2013) Prognostic factors of arthroscopic adhesiolysis for arthrofibrosis of the knee. Knee Surg Relat Res 25(4):202–206 - PubMed
  11. LaPrade RF, Pedtke AC, Roethle ST (2008) Arthroscopic posteromedial capsular release for knee flexion contractures. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16(5):469–475 - PubMed
  12. Leie MA, de Castro JV, Gomes JE (2021) Posterior knee capsulotomy for the relief of patellofemoral joint pain: long-term follow-up. J Knee Surg 34(2):164–170 - PubMed
  13. Lobenhoffer HP, Bosch U, Gerich TG (1996) Role of posterior capsulotomy for the treatment of extension deficits of the knee. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 4(4):237–241 - PubMed
  14. Lobenhoffer P, Gerich T, Hernandez R (1996) Treatment of knee extension deficits with combined arthroscopic debridement and posterior capsulotomy. Unfallchirurg 99(7):487–491 - PubMed
  15. Magit D, Wolff A, Sutton K, Medvecky MJ (2007) Arthrofibrosis of the Knee. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 15(11):682–694 - PubMed
  16. Mariani PP (2010) Arthroscopic release of the posterior compartments in the treatment of extension deficit of knee. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18(6):736–741 - PubMed
  17. Millett PJ, Williams RJ, Wickiewicz TL (1999) Open debridement and soft tissue release as a salvage procedure for the severely arthrofibrotic knee. Am J Sports Med 27(5):552–561 - PubMed
  18. Page MJ, Higgins JP, Sterne J (2020) Chapter 13: assessing risk of bias due to missing results in a synthesis. In: Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J et al (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 6.1. Cochrane - PubMed
  19. Munn Z, Barker TH, Moola S et al (2019) Methodological quality of case series studies: an introduction to the JBI critical appraisal tool. JBI Evid Synth. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00099 - PubMed
  20. Murad MH, Mustafa RA, Schünemann HJ, Sultan S, Santesso N (2017) Rating the certainty in evidence in the absence of a single estimate of effect. Evid Based Med 22(3):85–87 - PubMed
  21. Murata Y, Takahashi K, Yamagata M, Hanaoka E, Moriya H (2003) The knee-spine syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85B(1):95–99 - PubMed
  22. Noailles T, Chalopin A, Boissard M, Lopes R, Bouguennec N, Hardy A (2019) Incidence and risk factors for cyclops syndrome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic literature review. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 105(7):1401–1405 - PubMed
  23. Pace JL, Wahl CJ (2010) Arthroscopy of the posterior knee compartments: neurovascular anatomic relationships during arthroscopic transverse capsulotomy. Arthroscopy 26(5):637–642 - PubMed
  24. Page MJ, McKenzie J, Bossuyt P (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 134:103–112 - PubMed
  25. Ranuccio F, Familiari F, Tedesco G, La Camera F, Gasparini G (2017) Effects of notchplasty on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. Joints 5(3):173–179 - PubMed
  26. Tardy N, Thaunat M, Sonnery-Cottet B, Murphy C, Chambat P, Fayard J-M (2016) Extension deficit after ACL reconstruction: Is open posterior release a safe and efficient procedure? Knee 23(3):465–471 - PubMed
  27. Tröger M, Holschen M (2014) Arthroscopic arthrolysis for the treatment of movement disorders of the knee. Oper Orthop Traumatol 26(4):361–368 - PubMed
  28. Wierer G, Runer A, Gföller P, Fink C, Hoser C (2017) Extension deficit after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Is arthroscopic posterior release a safe and effective procedure? Knee 24(1):49–54 - PubMed

Publication Types