Manipulation under anesthesia following total knee arthroplasty: a comprehensive review of literature.

INTRODUCTION: The etiology of the stiff knee after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is largely unknown, although excessive scar tissue due to arthrofibrosis is an important reason for a limited range of motion (ROM) after this procedure. Persistent limited ROM after TKA results in poor patient-reported outcomes and is increasingly becoming a more prominent reason for TKA revision surgery. METHODS: A narrative review of current literature on manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) after TKA analyzing etiology and risk factors for stiffness after TKA, effectiveness of MUA and what is known about rehabilitation after MUA. RESULTS: Literature describes numerous risk factors for insufficient knee ROM after TKA, but a comprehensive valid risk model is lacking. MUA is an effective treatment option with evidence suggesting better outcomes if performed within the first 3 months after TKA. The wide variety in both the indication and timing for MUA, and the lack of scientific evidence on how to rehabilitate patients after MUA, complicates the interpretation of available literature. This is even more so the case on the reporting of one versus two or more MUAs after TKA. CONCLUSION: Future comparative trials, preferably with a randomized study design, should be conducted to elude more clear indications for MUA, to give clinical guidance on correct timing for MUA and on how to rehabilitate patients afterward.

What Is the Efficacy of Repeat Manipulations Under Anesthesia to Treat Stiffness Following Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) can help post-total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients who have knee stiffness regain range-of-motion. However, despite undergoing MUA, patients may have persistent knee stiffness. Often, this persistent knee stiffness is treated with a repeat MUA. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate repeat MUAs by assessing: (1) demographic characteristics, (2) range-of-motion, (3) clinical outcomes, and (4) rate of revision surgery in post-TKA patients with persistent knee stiffness who either underwent a single MUA or repeat MUAs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One-hundred-and-sixty-seven post-TKA who had undergone an MUA between 2005 and 2011 at two institutions were reviewed. Patients were stratified into those who had a single-MUA (138 knees) and those who had a repeat MUA (29 knees). The mean follow-up period was 63 months (range, 36 to 90 months). The incidence of repeat MUA within this cohort was determined. Demographics and ROM were compared using Student t-test and Chi-square as appropriate. Functional outcomes were assessed using Knee Society scores (KSS) and compared between the two cohorts. RESULTS: Among the 167 patients who underwent a MUA, 29 (17%) required repeat manipulations. The repeat MUA cohort was younger and more likely to have osteonecrosis as the underlying cause of knee disease. For the repeat MUA cohort, 17 patients (59%) had achieved satisfactory mean gains in ROM after their repeat MUAs. These patients had also achieved excellent mean Knee Society objective and functional scores. However, another seven knees (24%) had further persistent knee stiffness requiring arthrolysis of adhesions and five patients (17%) had undergone revision of the polyethylene spacer or patellar component to improve range-of-motion. CONCLUSION: In this study, the majority of patients who had undergone a repeat MUA were able to achieve improvements in flexion range-of-motion and functional outcomes. However, the remaining patients required more invasive procedure to treat persistent knee stiffness. In patients who have persistent knee stiffness after MUAs, a repeat MUA may be helpful to increase range-of-motion and function.

Sacroiliac joint fusion and the implications for manual therapy diagnosis and treatment.

The present paper examines gender differences and changes in prevalence of ankylosed sacroiliac joint (SIJ) with age. SIJs of 287 patients (159 males and 128 females), aged 22-93 years, were examined for fusion, using 3-D CT images. Presence, side and location of the fusion along the joint borders were recorded. Fusion of the SIJ was found to be gender and age dependent; present in 27.7% of all males in contrast to only 3.0% in females (p<0.001). The phenomenon increased with age in the male population from 5.8% in the 20-39 age cohorts to 46.7% in the 80+ cohort. As mobilization and/or manipulation of a dysfunctional SIJ are common procedures used by manual therapists, the effect that aging has on SIJ mobility requires therapists to alter or change their method with advancing age.