» Articles » PMID: 27519962

Biomechanical Effects of Different Varus and Valgus Alignments in Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Overview
Journal J Arthroplasty
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2016 Aug 14
PMID 27519962
Citations 38
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Medial unicompartmental tibial components are not always positioned following neutral mechanical alignment and a tibial varus alignment of 3° has been suggested based on several clinical follow-up studies. However, no biomechanical justification is currently available to confirm the suitability of different alignment positions.

Methods: This study aims at quantifying the effects on bone stresses, load distribution, ligament strains, and polyethylene insert stress distribution induced by a possible varus/valgus alignment in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, ranging from 6° of varus to 6° of valgus, developing and using a validated patient-specific finite element model.

Results: Results demonstrate that both neutral mechanical and 3° of varus alignment induce lower stress distributions than valgus or a higher varus alignment for which higher values, up to 40%, are achieved for the polyethylene stress. When a unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is implanted, a mismatch in the stiffness of the joint is introduced, changing the load distribution from medial to lateral for all configurations with respect to the native configuration. However, slight differences are noticeable among the different configurations with a maximum of 190 N and 90 N for the lateral and the medial side, respectively.

Conclusion: Neutral mechanical or 3° of varus alignment present similar biomechanical outputs in the bone, collateral ligament strain, and on the polyethylene insert. A 6° varus alignment or changes in valgus alignment were always associated with more detrimental effects.

Citing Articles

Differential effects of tibia varus deformity on clinical outcomes following high tibial osteotomy and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for moderate medial compartment osteoarthritis with moderate varus alignment.

Park J, Han S, Jang K, Shin S Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2025; 145(1):119.

PMID: 39798035 DOI: 10.1007/s00402-024-05718-3.


Fractures in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty are associated with a decreased medial keel-cortex distance of the tibial implant.

Watrinet J, Berger D, Blum P, Fabritius M, Arnholdt J, Schipp R Knee Surg Relat Res. 2024; 36(1):36.

PMID: 39578924 PMC: 11583789. DOI: 10.1186/s43019-024-00237-2.


Effect of femoral prosthesis flexion angle on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with mobile platform.

Zhou Y, Yuan P, Tang R, Li Y, Tang M J Orthop Surg Res. 2024; 19(1):725.

PMID: 39506788 PMC: 11542343. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-05224-7.


Effect of design and surgical parameters variations in mobile-bearing versus fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A finite element analysis.

Luyckx T, Bori E, Saldari R, Fiore S, Altamore V, Innocenti B J Exp Orthop. 2024; 11(4):e70053.

PMID: 39463465 PMC: 11512207. DOI: 10.1002/jeo2.70053.


Biomechanical analysis of patient specific cone vs conventional stem in revision total knee arthroplasty.

Piovan G, Bori E, Padalino M, Pianigiani S, Innocenti B J Orthop Surg Res. 2024; 19(1):439.

PMID: 39068461 PMC: 11282788. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-04936-0.