Latar belakang: Anterior knee pain (AKP) merupakan penyebab utama terjadinyapermasalahan yang persisten paska dilakukannya TKR. Saat ini di Indonesia belumterdapat data mengenai luaran ini untuk mengevaluasi paska dilakukannya operasiTKR, oleh karenanya kami merasa perlu untuk dilakukannya penelitian ini.Metode: Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kohort retrospektif. Subjek adalahpasien yang menjalani operasi TKR di RS Cipto Mangunkusomo sejak Januari 2011sampai Januari 2019. Pada penelitian ini, didapatkan total 69 lutut dimana 39 lututdilakukan tindakan non-resurfacing sementara 30 lutut dilakukan resurfacing.Pasien dengan revisi TKR, riwayat infeksi sendi lutut atau tumor, implantloosening, riwayat operasi pada sendi lutut sebelumnya di eksklusi dari penelitianini.Hasil: Pada kelompok non-resurfacing terdapat 32 lutut perempuan (82,1%) dan 7lutut laki-laki (17,9%), sementara kelompok resurfacing terdapat 22 lututperempuan (73,3%) dan 8 lutut laki-laki (26,7%). Baik pada kelompok nonresurfacingdan resurfacing, terdapat peningkatan skor paska operatif joint motion(p<0,001) dan expectation (p=0,046) dengan pengukuran KSS, namun nilaisatisfaction dibandingkan preoperative dan paska operatif pada kedua kelompokmenunjukan perbedaan yang tidak bermakna (p=0,314) dibandingkan dengansebelum dilakukannya operasi. Pada penilaian dengan kuesioner Kujala, ditemukanperbedaan bermakna skor total (47 [42-58] vs 55 [45-63]; p < 0,001), limp (3 [3-5]vs 5 [2-5]; p < 0,001), support (3 [3-5] vs 5 [3-5]; p < 0,001), walking (2 [2-3] vs 2[2-5]; p < 0,035), running (0 [0-6] vs 3 [0-8]; p < 0,001), jumping (0 [0-0] vs 3 [0-8]; p = 0,010), dan flexion deficiency (3 [0-3] vs 3 [0-5]; p = 0,021).Kesimpulan: Kami menemukan bahwa TKR non-resurfasing berhubungan dengankejadian AKP. Namun tidak terdapat perbedaan skala nyeri diantara kelompokresurfacing dan non-resurfacing patella. Selain itu, terdapat perbedaan signifikanskor Kujala dan KSS pada kedua kelompok.

---

Background: Anterior knee pain (AKP) is a main problem that commonly occurs

after total knee replacement (TKR). In Indonesia, there are no data regarding this

outcome.

Methods: This study aims to evaluate AKP after TKR. This was a retrospective

study. Subjects were patients who underwent TKR from January 2011 to January

2019.

Results: There were 69 knees in this study, in which 39 subjects were nonresurfaced.

Those with revision TKR, history of infected knee joint or tumor,

implant loosening, history of infected knee joint, were excluded from this study. In

the non-resurfaced group, there were 32 (82.1%) women’s knees and 7 (17.9%)

men’s knees. Whereas, in the resurfaced group, there were 22 (73.3%) women’s

knees, and 8 (26.7%) men’s knees. In both the non-resurfaced and resurfacing

groups, there was an increase in joint motion scores (p<0.001) and expectation

(p=0.046) by measuring KSS but satisfaction scores compared to preoperative and

postoperative in both groups showed no significant differences (p=0.314)

compared to before surgery. In the assessment using the Kujala questionnaire,

differences in total score (47 [42-58] vs 55 [45-63]; p <0.001), limping (3 [3-5] vs

5 [2-5]; p <0.001 ), support (3 [3-5] vs 5 [3-5]; p <0.001), walking (2 [2-3] vs 2

[2-5]; p <0.035), running (0 [0- ] 6] vs 3 [0-8]; p <0.001), jump (0 [0-0] vs 3 [0-

8]; p = 0.010), and flexion deficiency (3 [0-3] vs 3 [ 0 -5]; p = 0.021).

Conclusion: We found that non-resurfacing patellar TKR was associated with

AKP. But there was no difference in pain scale between the resurfacing and nonresurfacing

patella groups Moreover, there were significant differences of both

Kujala Score and Knee Society Score in both groups.