| Literature DB >> 22581351 |
Eirik Aunan1, Thomas Kibsgård, John Clarke-Jenssen, Stephan M Röhrl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ligament balancing is considered a prerequisite for good function and survival in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, there is no consensus on how to measure ligament balance intra-operatively and the degree of stability obtained after different balancing techniques is not clarified.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22581351 PMCID: PMC3400753 DOI: 10.1007/s00402-012-1536-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg ISSN: 0936-8051 Impact factor: 3.067
Patient demographics and Knee Society Score (KSS) at baseline divided in groups with and without ligament balancing
| Variable | Without ligament balancing ( | With ligament balancing ( |
| Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (female) | 17 (56.7 %) | 39 (55.7 %) | 100 | |
| Agea | 71.0 (7.3) 53 to 83 | 69.2 (8.4) 42–81 | 0.30 | 69.7 (8.1) 42–83 |
| BMIa | 28.8 (3.5) 22 to 34 | 29.5 (4.0) 23–43 | 0.41 | 29.3 (3.9) 22–43 |
| KSS knee scorea | 36.3 (20.4) −5 to 95 | 31,9 (14.3) 5–67 | 0.22 | 33.2 (16.4) −5–95 |
| KSS function scorea | 64.8 (18.5) 30 to 100 | 64.9 (20.6) 30–100 | 0.98 | 64.9 (19.9) 30–100 |
aData are presented as means, (SDs), and ranges
Alignment and deformity at baseline divided in groups with and without ligament balancing
| Alignment | Without ligament balancing | With ligament balancing |
| Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Deformitya |
| Deformitya | |||
| Varus knees | 18 | 7.4 (5.2) 1–21 | 63 | 10.0 (4.5) 3–22 | 0.04 | 81 |
| Valgus knees | 9 | 5.9 (1.8) 3–9 | 6 | 5.0 (1.8) 2–7 | 0.37 | 15 |
| Neutral knees | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | – | 4 |
| Total | 30 | 70 | 100 | |||
aDeformity was measured in degrees and defined as the deviation from the ideal mechanical axis on HKA X-rays. Data are presented as means, (SDs), and ranges
Fig. 1a The tool for measuring condylar lift-off consists of four spatulas made of polyethylene, from 2 to 5 mm thick. b With the knee in 90° of flexion medial condylar lift-off was defined as the distance in the frontal plane from the deepest point of the polyethylene tray to the most posterior point of the femoral condyle. The measurement was performed with the leg in a reversed crossed-leg position under passive varus-stress from the weight of the lower leg with the thickest spatula that could be introduced without force
Number of ligaments released in varus and valgus deformed knees
| Ligament | Varus knees ( | Valgus knees ( |
|---|---|---|
| MCL | ||
| Anterior part | 49 | |
| Posterior part | 39 | |
| Medial posterior capsule | 10 | |
| Semimembranosus | 2 | |
| Pes anserinus | – | – |
| PCL | 27 | 3 |
| LCL | 1a | 1 |
| Popliteus tendon | 4a | 3 |
| Posterolateral corner | 1 | |
| Iliotibial tract | 2 | |
| Lateral posterior capsule | 2 | |
MCL medial collateral ligament, PCL posterior cruciate ligament, LCL lateral collateral ligament
aCompensatory release in varus knees
Medial and lateral lift-off in extension and 90° of flexion in knees with or without ligament balancing
| Knee alignment | Position | Without ligament balancing | With ligament balancing |
| Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Varus knees |
|
| 81 | ||
| Extension | |||||
| Medial | 1.6 (1.2–1.9) 1–3 | 1.9 (1.7–2.1) 1–4 | 0.17 | ||
| Lateral | 2.0 (1.6–2.4) 1–3 | 2.1 (1.9–2.3) 1–5 | 0.90 | ||
| Flexion | |||||
| Medial | 2.7 (2.2–3.2) 0–4 | 3.4 (2.9–3.9) 1–9 | 0.30 | ||
| Lateral | 3.2 (2.6–3.9) 1–5 | 3.5 (3.1–3.9) 1–10 | 0.74 | ||
| Valgus knees |
|
| 15 | ||
| Extension | |||||
| Medial | 2.0 (1.6–2.4) 1–3 | 2.7 (1.4–3.9) 1–4 | 0.25 | ||
| Lateral | 1.7 (1.1–2.2) 1–3 | 1.7 (0.2–3.1) 0–4 | 1.00 | ||
| Flexion | |||||
| Medial | 2.4 (1.6–3.3) 1–4 | 3.7 (0.9–6.5) 1–8 | 0.33 | ||
| Lateral | 3.0 (1.7–4.3) 1–7 | 4.3 (2.9–5.8) 2–6 | 0.12 | ||
| Neutral knees |
|
| 4 | ||
| Extension | |||||
| Medial | 2.3 (–) 1–3 | 1.0 | |||
| Lateral | 1.3 (–) 0–3 | 3.0 | |||
| Flexion | |||||
| Medial | 3.3 (–) 2–4 | 2.0 | |||
| Lateral | 2.3 (–) 0–5 | 3.0 | |||
With the knee in extension the surgeon stressed the collateral ligaments until a firm endpoint. Lift-off was defined as the distance in the frontal plane from the deepest point of the polyethylene tray to the most distal point of the femoral condyle. With the knee in 90° of flexion, the same measurements were done between the deepest point of the polyethylene tray and the most posterior point of the femoral condyle while the collateral ligaments were stressed by gravity (see text). Values are expressed in millimeters as means, (95 % CIs), and ranges
Fig. 2The degree of medial–lateral symmetry in lift-off that was achieved after implantation of the prosthesis, in knees where ligament balancing was not necessary (n = 30) and in knees that were ligament balanced according to the Whiteside method (n = 70). Negative values represent more lift-off laterally than medially. Positive values mean more lift-off medially than laterally
Fig. 3The relationship between the flexion gap and the extension gap. Positive values mean the flexion gap is larger than the extension gap. Negative values mean the extension gap is larger. Zero means the two gaps are of equal size