| Literature DB >> 32723310 |
Teruyuki Miyasaka1,2, Mitsuru Saito3, Daisaburo Kurosaka3, Ryo Ikeda3, Shoki Yamanaka4,3, Keishi Marumo3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Greater accuracy is needed when determining the final femoral component (FC) rotation during total knee arthroplasty (TKA), because this parameter affects soft tissue balance during flexion and patellar tracking. Anatomical markers, such as the epicondylar axis, are typically used to determine the final FC rotation, although intraoperative confirmation may be challenging. Therefore, rotational position is frequently determined with the posterior condylar axis (PCA) as a landmark. However, the thickness of the posterior condylar cartilage has not been considered and may not be represented on preoperative images. We used plain X-rays to measure the thickness of the medial and lateral posterior condylar cartilage fragments postoperatively, and investigated the effects of differences in cartilage thickness on final FC rotation.Entities:
Keywords: Articular cartilage; Femoral component; Posterior condyle; Posterior intercondylar distance; Radiographs; Rotational alignment; Total knee arthroplasty
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32723310 PMCID: PMC7388502 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-020-03537-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Patient characteristics
| Total ( | Men ( | Women ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 74.9 ± 7.6 | 72.0 ± 8.8 | 76.7 ± 6.3 | 0.03 |
| Height (cm) | 153.5 ± 8.7 | 161.2 ± 7.4 | 148.9 ± 5.7 | < 0.001 |
| Weight (kg) | 63.5 ± 12.1 | 71.9 ± 12.0 | 58.4 ± 9.0 | < 0.001 |
| BMI | 26.8 ± 3.8 | 27.6 ± 3.7 | 26.3 ± 3.8 | 0.27 |
| HKA angle (deg) | 192.2 ± 6.0 | 193.4 ± 5.2 | 191.5 ± 6.4 | 0.28 |
BMI body mass index, HKA angle hip-knee-ankle angle. Values are reported as the mean ± standard deviation
Fig. 1Measuring posterior femoral intercondylar distance (d)
Fig. 2Radiographs taken parallel to the cut surface
Fig. 3Measuring cartilage thickness (medial side: m; lateral side: l)
Fig. 4Calculation method for impact on rotation (θ)
Comparison of cartilage thickness, posterior intercondylar distance and impact on rotation between men and women
| Total ( | Men ( | Women ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medial side: m (mm) | 0.6 ± 0.5 (0.0 | 0.9 ± 0.6 (0.3 | 0.4 ± 0.4 (0.0 | < 0.001* |
| Lateral side: l (mm) | 1.8 ± 0.6 (0.4 | 1.9 ± 0.4 (0.9 | 1.7 ± 0.6 (0.4 | 0.16 |
| Differences: l − m (mm) | 1.2 ± 0.7 (− 0.1 | 1.0 ± 0.6 (− 0.1 | 1.3 ± 0.7 (0.2 | 0.16 |
| Posterior intercondylar distance: d (mm) | 46.1 ± 3.3 (39.0 | 49.1 ± 2.7 (44.0 | 44.2 ± 2.0 (39.0 | < 0.001* |
| Impact on rotation: θ (°) | 1.5 ± 0.9 (− 0.1 | 1.2 ± 0.7 (− 0.1 | 1.7 ± 0.9 (0.3 | 0.12 |
Data are presented as the mean ± standard deviation. Medial side, m; lateral side, l; differences, l – m; posterior intercondylar distance, d; impact on rotation, θ. *Significant value
Results from the present and previous studies
| Author/ Journal | Methodology | Medial side: m (mm) | Lateral side: l (mm) | Posterior intercondylar distance: d (mm) | Impact on rotation: θ (°) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asada et al. The Knee (2012) | CT Arthrography | 1.1 ± 0.7 (−0.3 | |||
| Tashiro et al. KSSTA (2012) | MRI | 1.7 ± 0.7 1.5 ± 0.7 | |||
| Fujii et al. Surg Radiol Anat (2012) | Cartilage excision by scalpel | 0.7 ± 0.7 (0.0 | 2.1 ± 0.7 (0.0 | 1.7 ± 1.3 (0.0 | |
| Hamada et al. J Med Invest (2017) | MPR imaging and navigation | 1.7 ± 1.2 | |||
CT computed tomography, MPR multiplanar reformation, MRI magnetic resonance imaging; Data are presented as the mean ± standard deviation
Fig. 5Association between height and posterior intercondylar distance Men: r = 0.404, p = 0.086; women: r = 0.601, p < 0.001 (Pearson’s correlation coefficient)
Fig. 6Association between posterior intercondylar distance (d) and impact on rotation (θ). All subjects: r = − 0.219, p = 0.126; men: r = 0.267, p = 0.269; women: r = − 0.299, p < 0.103 (Pearson’s correlation coefficient)
Comparison of external rotation angle in all subjects by subgroups divided according to median value
| Posterior intercondylar distance (subgrouping according to the median value) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short distance group (< 46 mm) | Long distance group (≥46 mm) | ||||
| n | Data | n | Data | ||
| Angle | 24 | 1.647 ± 0.949 | 26 | 1.258 ± 0.720 | 0.113 |
Data are presented as the mean ± standard deviation. p-value: Welch’s t-test
Comparison of external rotation angle between subgroups of men divided according to median value
| Posterior intercondylar distance (subgrouping according to the median value) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short distance group (≤51 mm) | Long distance group (> 51 mm) | ||||
| n | Data | n | Data | ||
| Angle | 11 | 0.991 ± 0.783 | 8 | 1.457 ± 0.668 | 0.182 |
Data are presented as the mean ± standard deviation. p-value: Welch’s t-test
Comparison of external rotation angle between subgroups of women divided according to median value
| Posterior intercondylar distance (subgrouping using the median as a split point) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short distance group (≤44 mm) | Long distance group (> 44 mm) | ||||
| n | Data | n | Data | ||
| Angle | 20 | 1.800 ± 0.949 | 11 | 1.243 ± 0.628 | 0.060 |
Data are presented as the mean ± standard deviation. p-value: Welch’s t-test