Infrapatellar Fat Pad Resection or Preservation during Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Considerations of how to improve postoperative outcomes for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have included preservation of the infrapatellar fat pad (IPFP). Although the IPFP is commonly resected during TKA procedures, there is controversy regarding whether resection or preservation should be implemented, and how this influences outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate how IPFP resection and preservation impacts postoperative flexion, pain, Insall-Salvati Ratio (ISR), Knee Society Score (KSS), patellar tendon length (PTL), and satisfaction in primary TKA. PubMed, EBSCO host, and SCOPUS were queried to retrieve all reports evaluating IPFP resection or preservation during TKA, which resulted into 488 studies. Two reviewers independently reviewed these articles for eligibility based on pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria. Eleven studies were identified for final analysis, which reported on 11,996 cases. Patient demographics, type of surgical intervention, follow-up duration, and clinical outcome measures were collected and analyzed. Complete resection was implemented in 3,723 cases (31%), partial resection in 5,458 cases (45.5%), and preservation of the IPFP in 2,815 cases (23.5%). Clinical outcome measures included PTL (5 studies), knee flexion (4 studies), pain (6 studies), KSS (3 studies), ISR (3 studies), and patient satisfaction (1 study). No differences were found following IPFP resection for patient satisfaction (p = 0.98), ISR (p > 0.05), and KSS (p > 0.05). There was mixed evidence for PTL, pain, and knee flexion following IPFP resection versus preservation. Studies of shorter follow-up intervals suggested improved pain following resection, while reports of longer follow-up times indicated that resection resulted in increased pain. Given the mixed data available from the current literature, we were unable to conclude that one surgical technique can definitively be considered superior over the other. More extensive research, including randomized controlled trials, is required to better elucidate potential differences between the surgical handling choices. Future studies should focus on patient conditions in which one technique would be best indicated to establish guidelines for best surgical outcomes in those patients.