Yong-Gon Koh1, Jin-Ah Lee2, Hwa-Yong Lee2, Heoung-Jae Chun2, Hyo-Jeong Kim3, Kyoung-Tak Kang4. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Joint Reconstruction Center, Yonsei Sarang Hospital, 10 Hyoryeong-ro, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06698, South Korea. 2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Yonsei University, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, South Korea. 3. Department of Sport and Healthy Aging, Korea National Sport University, 1239 Yangjae-dearo, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05541, South Korea. 4. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Yonsei University, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, South Korea. tagi1024@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate whether different tibial-femoral conformities for patient-specific mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKAs) preserve natural knee kinematics, using computational simulations. METHODS: Different designs for patient-specific mobile-bearing UKAs were evaluated using finite element analysis. Three designs for the identical femoral component were considered: flat (non-conforming design), anatomy-mimetic, and conforming for the tibial insert. RESULTS: The conforming design for the patient-specific mobile-bearing UKAs exhibited a 1.2 mm and 0.7° decrease in the translation and rotation, respectively, in the swing phase compared with those of the natural knee. In addition, the femoral rollback and internal rotation were 2.6 mm and 1.2° lower, respectively, than those of the natural knee, for the conforming design under the deep-knee-bend condition. The flat design for the patient-specific mobile-bearing UKAs exhibited a 2.2 mm and 1.4° increase in the femoral rollback and rotation compared with the natural knee under the deep-knee-bend condition. The anatomy-mimetic patient-specific mobile-bearing UKAs best preserved the natural knee kinematics under the gait and deep-knee-bend loading conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The kinematics of the loading conditions in patient-specific mobile-bearing UKAs was determined to closely resemble those of a native knee. In additional, by replacing the anatomy-mimetic design with a mobile-bearing, natural knee kinematics during gait and deep-knee-bend motions is preserved. These results confirm the importance of tibiofemoral conformity in preserving native knee kinematics in patient-specific mobile-bearing UKA.
PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate whether different tibial-femoral conformities for patient-specific mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKAs) preserve natural knee kinematics, using computational simulations. METHODS: Different designs for patient-specific mobile-bearing UKAs were evaluated using finite element analysis. Three designs for the identical femoral component were considered: flat (non-conforming design), anatomy-mimetic, and conforming for the tibial insert. RESULTS: The conforming design for the patient-specific mobile-bearing UKAs exhibited a 1.2 mm and 0.7° decrease in the translation and rotation, respectively, in the swing phase compared with those of the natural knee. In addition, the femoral rollback and internal rotation were 2.6 mm and 1.2° lower, respectively, than those of the natural knee, for the conforming design under the deep-knee-bend condition. The flat design for the patient-specific mobile-bearing UKAs exhibited a 2.2 mm and 1.4° increase in the femoral rollback and rotation compared with the natural knee under the deep-knee-bend condition. The anatomy-mimetic patient-specific mobile-bearing UKAs best preserved the natural knee kinematics under the gait and deep-knee-bend loading conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The kinematics of the loading conditions in patient-specific mobile-bearing UKAs was determined to closely resemble those of a native knee. In additional, by replacing the anatomy-mimetic design with a mobile-bearing, natural knee kinematics during gait and deep-knee-bend motions is preserved. These results confirm the importance of tibiofemoral conformity in preserving native knee kinematics in patient-specific mobile-bearing UKA.
Authors: Thomas W Hamilton; James M Rizkalla; Leonidas Kontochristos; Barbara E Marks; Stephen J Mellon; Christopher A F Dodd; Hemant G Pandit; David W Murray Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2017-05-11 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Jin-Ah Lee; Yong-Gon Koh; Paul Shinil Kim; Ki Won Kang; Yoon Hae Kwak; Kyoung-Tak Kang Journal: Bone Joint Res Date: 2020-09-23 Impact factor: 5.853