Koji Murakami1, Satoshi Hamai2, Ken Okazaki3, Yifeng Wang4, Satoru Ikebe5, Hidehiko Higaki4, Takeshi Shimoto6, Hideki Mizu-Uchi1, Yukio Akasaki1, Yasuharu Nakashima1. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan. hamachan@ortho.med.kyushu-u.ac.jp. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tokyo Women's Medical University, 8-1 Kawada-cho, Shinjyuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-8666, Japan. 4. Department of Life Science, Faculty of Life Science, Kyushu Sangyo University, 2-3-1 Matsugadai, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, 813-8503, Japan. 5. Department of Creative Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Kitakyushu College, 5-20-1 Shii, Kokuraminami-ku, Kitakyushu, Fukuoka, 802-0985, Japan. 6. Department of Information and Systems Engineering, Faculty of Information Engineering, Fukuoka Institute of Technology, 3-30-1 Wajiro-higashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, 811-0295, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of two types of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs: posterior-stabilized (PS) and bicruciate-stabilized (BCS) on in vivo kinematics during gait. METHODS: Continuous X-ray images of the gait were taken using a flat panel detector for 23 PS and BCS TKAs. We analyzed the tibiofemoral implant flexion angle, anteroposterior (AP) translation, axial rotation, and anterior/posterior cam-post contact using image-matching techniques. RESULTS: Double knee actions were demonstrated for the PS and BCS design (35 and 61%, respectively, p = 0.08). The tibiofemoral AP positions were significantly more posterior at peak extension (- 1.7 ± 2.2 and 1.0 ± 2.5 mm, respectively, p < 0.01) and anterior at peak flexion (1.3 ± 2.3 and - 0.8 ± 2.8 mm, respectively, p = 0.01) for the PS design than for the BCS design, with a significant difference in AP translation (3.0 ± 3.9 mm anterior and 1.7 ± 2.8 mm posterior, respectively, p < 0.01). Anterior/posterior tibial post contacts were found in 83/4% and 74/30% for the PS and BCS designs, respectively, with a significant difference in posterior contact (p = 0.72/0.04, respectively). CONCLUSION: The knee flexion pattern, tibiofemoral AP translation, axial rotation, and cam-post contact during gait varied, depending on the type of implant, the PS and BCS designs.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of two types of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs: posterior-stabilized (PS) and bicruciate-stabilized (BCS) on in vivo kinematics during gait. METHODS: Continuous X-ray images of the gait were taken using a flat panel detector for 23 PS and BCS TKAs. We analyzed the tibiofemoral implant flexion angle, anteroposterior (AP) translation, axial rotation, and anterior/posterior cam-post contact using image-matching techniques. RESULTS: Double knee actions were demonstrated for the PS and BCS design (35 and 61%, respectively, p = 0.08). The tibiofemoral AP positions were significantly more posterior at peak extension (- 1.7 ± 2.2 and 1.0 ± 2.5 mm, respectively, p < 0.01) and anterior at peak flexion (1.3 ± 2.3 and - 0.8 ± 2.8 mm, respectively, p = 0.01) for the PS design than for the BCS design, with a significant difference in AP translation (3.0 ± 3.9 mm anterior and 1.7 ± 2.8 mm posterior, respectively, p < 0.01). Anterior/posterior tibial post contacts were found in 83/4% and 74/30% for the PS and BCS designs, respectively, with a significant difference in posterior contact (p = 0.72/0.04, respectively). CONCLUSION: The knee flexion pattern, tibiofemoral AP translation, axial rotation, and cam-post contact during gait varied, depending on the type of implant, the PS and BCS designs.
Authors: Jennifer M Weiss; Philip C Noble; Michael A Conditt; Harold W Kohl; Seth Roberts; Karon F Cook; Michael J Gordon; Kenneth B Mathis Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Bogdan Deleanu; Radu Prejbeanu; Dan Crisan; Vlad Predescu; Iulian Popa; Dan V Poenaru Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 3.075