Kevin A Cassidy1, Scott M Tucker2, Yogesh Rajak2, Mohammad Kia2, Carl W Imhauser2, Geoffrey H Westrich1, Thomas J Heyse3. 1. Adult Reconstruction & Joint Replacement Division, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA. 2. Department of Biomechanics, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA. 3. Department of Orthopedics and Rheumatology, University Hospital Marburg, Germany. Electronic address: heyse@med.uni-marburg.de.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Progression of osteoarthritis in the unreplaced compartment following unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) may be hastened if kinematics is disturbed following UKA implantation. The purpose of this study was to analyze tibiofemoral kinematics of the balanced and overstuffed UKA in comparison with the native knee during passive flexion since this is a common clinical assessment. METHODS: Ten cadaveric knees were mounted to robotic manipulator and underwent passive flexion from 0 to 90°. The kinematic pathway was recorded in the native knee and in the balanced, fixed bearing UKA. The medial UKA was implanted using a measured resection technique. Additionally, a one millimeter thicker tibial insert was installed to simulate the effects of overstuffing. Tibial kinematics in relation to the femur was recorded. RESULTS: Following UKA the tibia was externally rotated, and in valgus relative to the native knee near extension. In flexion, installing the UKA caused the knee to be translated medially and anteriorly. The tibia was translated distally through the entire range of flexion after UKA. Compared to the balanced UKA, overstuffing further increased valgus at full extension and distal translation of the tibia from full extension to 45° flexion. CONCLUSIONS: UKA implantation altered tibiofemoral kinematics in all planes. Differences were small; nevertheless, they may affect tibiofemoral loading patterns. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Alterations in tibiofemoral kinematics following UKA might have implications for prosthesis failure and progression of osteoarthritis in the remaining compartment. Overstuffing should be avoided as it further increased valgus and did not improve the remaining kinematics.
INTRODUCTION: Progression of osteoarthritis in the unreplaced compartment following unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) may be hastened if kinematics is disturbed following UKA implantation. The purpose of this study was to analyze tibiofemoral kinematics of the balanced and overstuffed UKA in comparison with the native knee during passive flexion since this is a common clinical assessment. METHODS: Ten cadaveric knees were mounted to robotic manipulator and underwent passive flexion from 0 to 90°. The kinematic pathway was recorded in the native knee and in the balanced, fixed bearing UKA. The medial UKA was implanted using a measured resection technique. Additionally, a one millimeter thicker tibial insert was installed to simulate the effects of overstuffing. Tibial kinematics in relation to the femur was recorded. RESULTS: Following UKA the tibia was externally rotated, and in valgus relative to the native knee near extension. In flexion, installing the UKA caused the knee to be translated medially and anteriorly. The tibia was translated distally through the entire range of flexion after UKA. Compared to the balanced UKA, overstuffing further increased valgus at full extension and distal translation of the tibia from full extension to 45° flexion. CONCLUSIONS: UKA implantation altered tibiofemoral kinematics in all planes. Differences were small; nevertheless, they may affect tibiofemoral loading patterns. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Alterations in tibiofemoral kinematics following UKA might have implications for prosthesis failure and progression of osteoarthritis in the remaining compartment. Overstuffing should be avoided as it further increased valgus and did not improve the remaining kinematics.