Literature DB >> 23052124

Constraints in posterior-stabilised TKA kinematics: a comparison of two generations of an implant.

Hemant Pandit1, Bernard Hendrik van Duren, M Price, S Tilley, Harinderjit Singh Gill, Neil P Thomas, David W Murray.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study tests the hypothesis that the design changes incorporated in the newer generation Triathlon posterior-stabilised TKA design result in kinematics that more closely reproduce the kinematics observed in healthy knees than those achieved by the older generation Scorpio posterior-stabilised TKA design.
METHODS: Eleven patients with Triathlon posterior-stabilised TKA, twelve patients with Scorpio posterior-stabilised TKA, and 22 subjects with normal asymptomatic knees underwent fluoroscopic assessment of the knee during a step-up exercise and a weight-bearing deep knee bend. Two-dimensional and three-dimensional knee kinematics were assessed including the maximum flexion, the patella tendon angle (PTA), the patella flexion angle (PFA), the minimum distance between cam and post, and the tibio-femoral contact positions.
RESULTS: The average maximum flexion achieved was 114° (SD 3°), 91° (SD 10°), and 143° (SD 14°) for the Triathlon, Scorpio, and Normal groups. The average cam/post mechanism engagement was at 63° (SD 24°) and 82° (SD 16°) for the Triathlon and Scorpio groups. The condylar contact points showed a paradoxical anterior slide for the Scorpio group which was not present in the Triathlon group. The PTA and PFA values of both implants showed significant differences from normal.
CONCLUSION: Overall, the Triathlon implant design, as compared to Scorpio TKA, produced kinematics closer to that of normal knees as proposed by the hypothesis. However, despite being closer to normal, the kinematics exhibited by the Triathlon group were still different from normal. A comparison of kinematic performance, taking into account altered design parameters, will contribute to improved understanding and future design considerations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23052124     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-012-2233-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  41 in total

1.  In vivo determination of condylar lift-off and screw-home in a mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  J B Stiehl; D A Dennis; R D Komistek; H S Crane
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  A low-riding patella in posterior stabilised total knee replacements alters quadriceps' mechanical advantage, resulting in reduced knee flexion moments.

Authors:  T R Ward; H Pandit; D Hollinghurst; A B Zavatsky; H S Gill; N P Thomas; D W Murray
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Improved quadriceps' mechanical advantage in single radius TKRs is not due to an increased patellar tendon moment arm.

Authors:  T R Ward; H Pandit; D Hollinghurst; P Moolgavkar; A B Zavatsky; H S Gill; N P Thomas; D W Murray
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2011-10-15       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Dysfunction of the posterior cruciate ligament in total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  James Edmund Arbuthnot; Olwyn Wainwright; Gareth Stables; Manickam Rathinam; David I Rowley; Michael J McNicholas
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Comparing in vivo kinematics of anterior cruciate-retaining and posterior cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Taka-aki Moro-oka; Marc Muenchinger; Jean-Pierre Canciani; Scott A Banks
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-06-21       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Is gait normal after total knee arthroplasty? Systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Clare E Milner
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2009-02-13       Impact factor: 1.601

7.  Assessment of the antero-posterior and rotational stability of the anterior cruciate ligament analogue in a guided motion bi-cruciate stabilized total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  J E Arbuthnot; R B Brink
Journal:  J Med Eng Technol       Date:  2009

Review 8.  Which primary total knee replacement? A review of currently available TKR in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  R Y Liow; D W Murray
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 1.891

9.  Tibiofemoral movement 2: the loaded and unloaded living knee studied by MRI.

Authors:  P F Hill; V Vedi; A Williams; H Iwaki; V Pinskerova; M A Freeman
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2000-11

Review 10.  Retention versus sacrifice of the posterior cruciate ligament in total knee replacement for treatment of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  W C H Jacobs; D J Clement; A B Wymenga
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2005-10-19
View more
  4 in total

1.  [Total knee arthroplasty in 2014 : Results, expectations, and complications].

Authors:  G Matziolis; E Röhner
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Varus femoral and tibial coronal alignments result in different kinematics and kinetics after total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Mutsumi Watanabe; Shinichi Kuriyama; Shinichiro Nakamura; Yoshihisa Tanaka; Kohei Nishitani; Moritoshi Furu; Hiromu Ito; Shuichi Matsuda
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-05-08       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Geometric variable designs of cam/post mechanisms influence the kinematics of knee implants.

Authors:  Ali Fallahiarezoodar; Mohammed Rafiq Abdul Kadir; Mina Alizadeh; Sangeetha Vasudevaraj Naveen; T Kamarul
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-08-23       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  In vivo knee kinematics of an innovative prosthesis design.

Authors:  Michael Worlicek; Jens Schaumburger; Robert Springorum; Guenther Maderbacher; Florian Zeman; Joachim Grifka; Clemens Baier
Journal:  Open Med (Wars)       Date:  2022-07-20
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.