Knee Kinematics of an Innovative Prosthesis Design

Overview

Journal Open Med (Wars)

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2022 Aug 8

PMID 35937001

Authors

Michael Worlicek

Jens Schaumburger

Robert Springorum

Guenther Maderbacher

Florian Zeman

Joachim Grifka

Clemens Baier

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Up to 20% of patients after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are not satisfied with the result. Several designs of new implants try to rebuild natural knee kinematics. We hypothesized that an innovative implant design leads to better results concerning femoral rollback compared to an established implant design. For this pilot study, 21 patients were examined during TKA, receiving either an innovative (ATTUNE Knee System (DePuy Inc.), = 10) or an established (PFC (DePuy Inc.), = 11) knee system. All patients underwent computer navigation. Knee kinematics was assessed after implantation. Outcome measure was anterior-posterior translation between femur and tibia. We were able to demonstrate a significantly higher femoral rollback in the innovative implant group ( < 0.001). The mean rollback of the innovative system was 11.00 mm (95%-confidence interval [CI], 10.77-11.24), of the established system 8.12 mm (95%-CI, 7.84-8.42). This study revealed a significantly increased lateral as well as medial femoral rollback of knees with the innovative prosthesis design. Our intraoperative finding needs to be confirmed using fluoroscopic or radiographic three-dimensional matching under full-weight-bearing conditions after complete recovery from surgery.

References

Banks S, Bellemans J, Nozaki H, Whiteside L, Harman M, Hodge W . Knee motions during maximum flexion in fixed and mobile-bearing arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003; (410):131-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000063121.39522.19. View

Victor J, Banks S, Bellemans J . Kinematics of posterior cruciate ligament-retaining and -substituting total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005; 87(5):646-55. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.87B5.15602. View

Culliton S, Bryant D, Overend T, MacDonald S, Chesworth B . The relationship between expectations and satisfaction in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011; 27(3):490-2. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.10.005. View

Hertzog M . Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies. Res Nurs Health. 2008; 31(2):180-91. DOI: 10.1002/nur.20247. View

van Duren B, Pandit H, Beard D, Zavatsky A, Gallagher J, Thomas N . How effective are added constraints in improving TKR kinematics?. J Biomech. 2007; 40 Suppl 1:S31-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.02.016. View

Hartford J, Banit D, Hall K, Kaufer H . Radiographic analysis of low contact stress meniscal bearing total knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001; 83(2):229-34. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200102000-00010. View

Suggs J, Hanson G, Park S, Moynihan A, Li G . Patient function after a posterior stabilizing total knee arthroplasty: cam-post engagement and knee kinematics. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2008; 16(3):290-6. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-007-0467-9. View

Lopez-Olivo M, Landon G, Siff S, Edelstein D, Pak C, Kallen M . Psychosocial determinants of outcomes in knee replacement. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011; 70(10):1775-81. DOI: 10.1136/ard.2010.146423. View

Massin P, Boyer P, Sabourin M . Less femorotibial rotation and AP translation in deep-dished total knee arthroplasty. An intraoperative kinematic study using navigation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2011; 20(9):1714-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-011-1740-5. View

10.

Dennis D, Komistek R, Mahfouz M, Walker S, Tucker A . A multicenter analysis of axial femorotibial rotation after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; (428):180-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000148777.98244.84. View

11.

Seon J, Park J, Jeong M, Jung W, Park K, Yoon T . Correlation between preoperative and postoperative knee kinematics in total knee arthroplasty using cruciate retaining designs. Int Orthop. 2010; 35(4):515-20. PMC: 3066316. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-010-1029-1. View

12.

Yue B, Varadarajan K, Rubash H, Li G . In vivo function of posterior cruciate ligament before and after posterior cruciate ligament-retaining total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2012; 36(7):1387-92. PMC: 3385884. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-011-1481-6. View

13.

Pandit H, van Duren B, Price M, Tilley S, Gill H, Thomas N . Constraints in posterior-stabilised TKA kinematics: a comparison of two generations of an implant. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012; 21(12):2800-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-012-2233-x. View

14.

Pandit H, Ward T, Hollinghurst D, Beard D, Gill H, Thomas N . Influence of surface geometry and the cam-post mechanism on the kinematics of total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005; 87(7):940-5. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.87B7.15716. View

15.

Bourne R, Chesworth B, Davis A, Mahomed N, Charron K . Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not?. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009; 468(1):57-63. PMC: 2795819. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9. View

16.

Yu C, Walker P, Dewar M . The effect of design variables of condylar total knees on the joint forces in step climbing based on a computer model. J Biomech. 2001; 34(8):1011-21. DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(01)00060-4. View

17.

Clarke H, Scuderi G . Flexion instability in primary total knee replacement. J Knee Surg. 2003; 16(2):123-8. View

18.

Dennis D, Komistek R, Mahfouz M, Haas B, Stiehl J . Multicenter determination of in vivo kinematics after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003; (416):37-57. DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000092986.12414.b5. View

19.

Argenson J, Scuderi G, Komistek R, Scott W, Kelly M, Aubaniac J . In vivo kinematic evaluation and design considerations related to high flexion in total knee arthroplasty. J Biomech. 2004; 38(2):277-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.02.027. View

20.

Pfitzner T, von Roth P, Preininger B, Perka C . [Does the ideal total knee arthroplasty for younger patients exist?]. Z Orthop Unfall. 2014; 152(4):393-8. DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1368605. View