Background: The goal of the study was to compare surgical approaches to the knee joint (anterior-medial approach--midvastus type and anterior-medial--midpatellar type) and assess their influence on post-operative range of motion, muscle strength, pain intensity and the rate of progress of rehabilitation in patients with different degrees of knee joint function.
Material and methods: The medical records of sixty-two (62) patients treated surgically by total knee joint arthroplasty were retrospectively reviewed. Depending on the surgical approach to the operated joint, the patients were divided into two equal groups of 31 patients each. Follow-up examinations were performed over a 2- to 3-year follow-up period.
Results: The patients with a knee endoprosthesis implanted using the midvastus approach required less analgesics and demonstrated better rehabilitation outcomes regarding the operated joint vs. those treated using the midpatellar approach. During the last follow-up visit, the range of motion, functional score (WOMAC and Merle D`Aubigne's scales in Postel's and Harris' modifications), muscle strength (Lovett's scale), and pain intensity (VAS scale and modified Laitinen's Questionnaire) did not differ significantly between the two groups.
Conclusions: The advantages of the midvastus approach observed in the early post-operative period (less pain, quicker knee joint rehabilitation) did not influence the final outcome in any statistically significant manner during a 2-3-year follow up period.