Literature DB >> 19278893

Elevated proximal tibial strains following unicompartmental knee replacement--a possible cause of pain.

D J Simpson1, A J Price, A Gulati, D W Murray, H S Gill.   

Abstract

Unexplained pain is an important complication of both total knee replacement and unicompartmental knee replacement. After unicompartmental knee replacement the most common site for the pain is antero-medial over the proximal tibia. The reason for this is not clear; however it may be due to high bone strain. A validated finite element model of a proximal tibia implanted with a fully congruent unicompartmental knee replacement was used to investigate the effect that certain implantation parameters had on the surface strains of the tibia. The tibial tray was positioned neutrally, and also mal-aligned separately in the sagittal and coronal planes. Different amounts of tibial tray overhang and underhang, and different resection levels were modelled. All models were compared to an intact tibia and the strain on the exterior cortex compared for a peak load condition measured in-vivo during a step-up activity. Following implantation the bone strain in the proximal tibia increased by 40%. There were no comparable increases in strain with different amounts of mal-alignment in the sagittal plane. There was a comparable increase in strain with a tibial tray overhang of 3 mm or greater, and excessive varus mal-alignment. This study has demonstrated that there is a large increase in strain, antero-medially on the proximal tibia, following implantation with a unicompartmental knee replacement. This may be the cause of antero-medial pain. As the bone remodels over time this strain will decrease, which probably explains why the pain usually settles within 12 months after surgery. However, certain errors in implantation result in strain values that might lead to degenerative remodelling and/or increased micro-damage of the bone; this may explain why the pain progressively worsens in some cases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19278893     DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2009.02.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Eng Phys        ISSN: 1350-4533            Impact factor:   2.242


  26 in total

1.  The coronal alignment after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty can be predicted: usefulness of full-length valgus stress radiography for evaluating correctability.

Authors:  Yasutaka Tashiro; Shuichi Matsuda; Ken Okazaki; Hideki Mizu-Uchi; Umito Kuwashima; Yukihide Iwamoto
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-08-26       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  An uncommon cause of cemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty failure: fracture of metallic components.

Authors:  Alfonso Manzotti; Cesare Chemello; Chris Pullen; Pietro Cerveri; Norberto Confalonieri
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  All-polyethylene unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is associated with increased risks of poorer knee society knee score and lower satisfaction in obese patients.

Authors:  Wayne Yong Xiang Foo; Ming Han Lincoln Liow; Jerry Yongqiang Chen; Darren Keng Jin Tay; Ngai Nung Lo; Seng Jin Yeo
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-01-30       Impact factor: 3.067

4.  [Comparison of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty in the treatment of severe medial compartment osteoarthritis].

Authors:  Qiang Huang; Yi Zeng; Qinsheng Hu; Haibo Si; Yong Nie; Bin Shen
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2021-09-15

5.  Minimally invasive Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in young patients.

Authors:  Marcus R Streit; Julia Streit; Tilman Walker; Thomas Bruckner; J Philippe Kretzer; Volker Ewerbeck; Christian Merle; Peter R Aldinger; Tobias Gotterbarm
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-05-10       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Evaluation of factors affecting tibial bone strain after unicompartmental knee replacement.

Authors:  Elise C Pegg; Jonathan Walter; Stephen J Mellon; Hemant G Pandit; David W Murray; Darryl D D'Lima; Benjamin J Fregly; Harinderjit S Gill
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2012-11-28       Impact factor: 3.494

7.  Kinematic alignment of medial UKA is safe: a systematic review.

Authors:  Charles Rivière; Sivan Sivaloganathan; Loic Villet; Philippe Cartier; Sébastien Lustig; Pascal-André Vendittoli; Justin Cobb
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-03-20       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: all-poly versus metal-backed tibial component-a long-term follow-up study.

Authors:  Vincenzo Sessa; Umberto Celentano
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2021-04-20       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Does Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty Affect Tibial Bone Strain? A Paired Cadaveric Comparison of Fixed- and Mobile-bearing Designs.

Authors:  Geert Peersman; Orcun Taylan; Joshua Slane; Ben Vanthienen; Jeroen Verhaegen; Lyne Anthonissen; G Harry van Lenthe; Thomas Heyse; Lennart Scheys
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 4.755

10.  Obesity does not adversely impact the outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of 80,798 subjects.

Authors:  Nikhil Agarwal; Kendrick To; Bridget Zhang; Wasim Khan
Journal:  Int J Obes (Lond)       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 5.095

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.