Keizo Wada1, Daisuke Hamada2, Tomoya Takasago1, Akihiro Nitta3, Tomohiro Goto1, Ichiro Tonogai1, Yoshihiro Tsuruo4, Koichi Sairyo1. 1. Department of Orthopedics, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Tokushima University Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan. 2. Department of Orthopedics, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Tokushima University Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan. daisuke.hamada@tokushima-u.ac.jp. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yoshinogawa Medical Center, 132-113 Kamojima Chiejima, Yoshinogawa, Tokushima, 776-0014, Japan. 4. Department of Anatomy, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Tokushima University Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the intraoperative kinematics of medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) with those of the native knee using a navigation system. METHODS: Six fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were included in the study. Medial UKA was performed in all right knees and lateral UKA was performed in all left knees. All UKA procedures were performed with a computerised navigation system. The tibial internal rotation angle and coronal alignment of the mechanical axis during passive knee flexion were assessed as rotational and varus/valgus kinematics before and after surgery using the navigation system. RESULTS: The rotation angles of the tibia in the early flexion phase of medial UKA were significantly larger than those of native knees (p = 0.008 at minimum knee flexion, p = 0.008 at 0° knee flexion). The rotational kinematics of lateral UKA was similar to those of the native knees throughout knee flexion. There were no significant differences in varus/valgus kinematics between native and UKA knees. CONCLUSION: The rotational kinematics of the native knee was not restored after medial UKA but was preserved after lateral UKA. There were no significant differences in the varus/valgus kinematics after either medial or lateral UKA when compared with those of the native knees. Thus, the geometry of the medial tibial articular surface is a determinant of the ability to restore the rotational kinematics of the native knee. Surgeons and implant designers should be aware that the anatomical medial articular geometry is an important factor in restoration of the native knee kinematics after knee arthroplasty.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the intraoperative kinematics of medial and lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) with those of the native knee using a navigation system. METHODS: Six fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were included in the study. Medial UKA was performed in all right knees and lateral UKA was performed in all left knees. All UKA procedures were performed with a computerised navigation system. The tibial internal rotation angle and coronal alignment of the mechanical axis during passive knee flexion were assessed as rotational and varus/valgus kinematics before and after surgery using the navigation system. RESULTS: The rotation angles of the tibia in the early flexion phase of medial UKA were significantly larger than those of native knees (p = 0.008 at minimum knee flexion, p = 0.008 at 0° knee flexion). The rotational kinematics of lateral UKA was similar to those of the native knees throughout knee flexion. There were no significant differences in varus/valgus kinematics between native and UKA knees. CONCLUSION: The rotational kinematics of the native knee was not restored after medial UKA but was preserved after lateral UKA. There were no significant differences in the varus/valgus kinematics after either medial or lateral UKA when compared with those of the native knees. Thus, the geometry of the medial tibial articular surface is a determinant of the ability to restore the rotational kinematics of the native knee. Surgeons and implant designers should be aware that the anatomical medial articular geometry is an important factor in restoration of the native knee kinematics after knee arthroplasty.
Authors: Kartik Mangudi M Varadarajan; Thomas Zumbrunn; Harry E Rubash; Henrik Malchau; Guoan Li; Orhun K Muratoglu Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2015-06-14 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Benedict U Nwachukwu; Frank M McCormick; William W Schairer; Rachel M Frank; Matthew T Provencher; Martin W Roche Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2014-04-05 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Richard A Berger; R Michael Meneghini; Joshua J Jacobs; Mitchell B Sheinkop; Craig J Della Valle; Aaron G Rosenberg; Jorge O Galante Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Hendrik A Zuiderbaan; Jelle P van der List; Saker Khamaisy; Danyal H Nawabi; Ran Thein; C Ishmael; Sophia Paul; Andrew D Pearle Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2015-11-21 Impact factor: 4.342