MAY 2010 | Volume 33 • Number 5 ■ Feature Article abstract Full article available online at OrthoSuperSite.com/view.aspx?rID=63297 Implant Removal Following Surgical Stabilization of Patella Fracture GUNASEKARAN KUMAR, FRCS(TR&ORTH); PRAVEEN K. MEREDDY, FRCS; SANTHOSH HAKKALAMANI, FRCS; NIGEL J. DONNACHIE, FRCS(TR&ORTH) Messrs Kumar, Mereddy, Hakkalamani, and Donnachie are from Wirral University Teaching Hospi- tal, Wirral, United Kingdom. Messrs Kumar, Mereddy, Hakkalamani, and Donnachie have no relevant financial relationships to disclose. Correspondence should be addressed to: Gunasekaran Kumar, FRCS(Tr&Orth), 111 Prenton Farm Rd, Prenton, Wirral, CH43 3DY, United Kingdom (gunasekarankumar@hotmail.com). doi: 10.3928/01477447-20100329-14 Patella fractures are relatively common injuries. Tension band wiring is commonly used to treat displaced patella fractures. The goal of this study was to assess the out- come and implant removal rate following surgical stabilization of patella fracture. A consecutive series of 67 patients over a 6-year period was reviewed. Minimum follow- up to fracture healing (3 months) was available in 63 patients. Forty-three men and 24 women with a mean age of 49 years (range, 14-90 years) underwent surgical stabilization of patella fracture. Three open fractures and associ- ated injuries were noted in 22 patients. Surgical treatment methods used were: ten- sion band wiring in 44, tension band wiring with cerclage wire in 13, tension band wiring with screws in 4, and screw fixation in 6. All fractures united. Two superficial infections responded to oral antibiotics. One patient had revision surgery at 6 weeks. Twenty-two patients required implant removal for implant-related symptoms. Mean follow-up in asymptomatic patients was 8 months (range, 3-18 months) and in patients with implant-related problems was 17 months (range, 10-36 months). Four patients were lost to follow-up. Surgical stabilization of patella fractures by current techniques demonstrated satisfac- tory fracture union. However, 1 in 3 required surgery for implant-related symptoms. In the younger than 60 years group, the implant removal rate was 40%. This high rate of implant removal must be discussed with the patient prior to surgery. Newer techniques to avoid skin irritation should be considered.