Surgical factors that contribute to tibial periprosthetic fracture after cementless Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacement: a finite element analysis.

IF 4.3 3区 工程技术 Q1 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology Pub Date : 2025-04-04 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fbioe.2025.1543792
Xiaoyi Min, Laurence Marks, Stephen Mellon, Takafumi Hiranaka, David Murray
{"title":"Surgical factors that contribute to tibial periprosthetic fracture after cementless Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacement: a finite element analysis.","authors":"Xiaoyi Min, Laurence Marks, Stephen Mellon, Takafumi Hiranaka, David Murray","doi":"10.3389/fbioe.2025.1543792","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Tibial periprosthetic fracture (TPF) is a severe complication of cementless Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (OUKR) with patient risk factors including small tibial size and tibia vara with an overhanging medial tibial condyle. Surgical factors also influence fracture but remain poorly defined. This finite element (FE) analysis study identified surgical risk factors for TPF after OUKR and determined the optimal tibial component positioning to minimise fracture risk.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Knees in two very high-risk, small, bilateral OUKR patients who had a TPF in one knee and a good result in the other were studied with FE analysis. Each patient's unfractured tibia was used as a comparator to study surgical factors. The tibial geometries were segmented from the pre-operative CT scans and FE models were built with the tibial components implanted in their post-operative positions. The resections in the fractured and unfractured tibias were compared regarding their mediolateral position, distal-proximal position, internal-external rotation and varus-valgus orientation. Models of the TPF tibial resections in the contralateral sides were also built in both patients. The risk of TPF was assessed by examining the magnitude and location of the highest maximum principal stress.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In both patients, large differences were found in the position and orientation of the tibial components in the fractured and unfractured tibias with the components in the fractured tibias placed more medially and distally. Suboptimal saw cuts resulted in poor positioning of the tibial components and created very high local stresses in the bone, particularly anteriorly (157 MPa and 702 MPa in the fractured side vs. 49 MPa and 63 MPa in the unfractured side in patient 1 and 2 respectively), causing fractures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In small patients with marked tibia vara the surgery is unforgiving. To avoid fracture, the horizontal cut should be conservative, aiming for a 3 bearing, the vertical cut should abut the apex of the medial tibial spine, and extreme internal or external rotation should be avoided. The component should be aligned with the posterior cortex and should not overhang anteriorly. In addition, contrary to current recommendations, the tibial component should be placed in varus (about 5°).</p>","PeriodicalId":12444,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology","volume":"13 ","pages":"1543792"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12006801/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2025.1543792","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Tibial periprosthetic fracture (TPF) is a severe complication of cementless Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (OUKR) with patient risk factors including small tibial size and tibia vara with an overhanging medial tibial condyle. Surgical factors also influence fracture but remain poorly defined. This finite element (FE) analysis study identified surgical risk factors for TPF after OUKR and determined the optimal tibial component positioning to minimise fracture risk.

Methods: Knees in two very high-risk, small, bilateral OUKR patients who had a TPF in one knee and a good result in the other were studied with FE analysis. Each patient's unfractured tibia was used as a comparator to study surgical factors. The tibial geometries were segmented from the pre-operative CT scans and FE models were built with the tibial components implanted in their post-operative positions. The resections in the fractured and unfractured tibias were compared regarding their mediolateral position, distal-proximal position, internal-external rotation and varus-valgus orientation. Models of the TPF tibial resections in the contralateral sides were also built in both patients. The risk of TPF was assessed by examining the magnitude and location of the highest maximum principal stress.

Results: In both patients, large differences were found in the position and orientation of the tibial components in the fractured and unfractured tibias with the components in the fractured tibias placed more medially and distally. Suboptimal saw cuts resulted in poor positioning of the tibial components and created very high local stresses in the bone, particularly anteriorly (157 MPa and 702 MPa in the fractured side vs. 49 MPa and 63 MPa in the unfractured side in patient 1 and 2 respectively), causing fractures.

Conclusion: In small patients with marked tibia vara the surgery is unforgiving. To avoid fracture, the horizontal cut should be conservative, aiming for a 3 bearing, the vertical cut should abut the apex of the medial tibial spine, and extreme internal or external rotation should be avoided. The component should be aligned with the posterior cortex and should not overhang anteriorly. In addition, contrary to current recommendations, the tibial component should be placed in varus (about 5°).

无骨水泥牛津单室膝关节置换术后导致胫骨假体周围骨折的手术因素:有限元分析。
背景:胫骨假体周围骨折(TPF)是无骨水泥牛津单室膝关节置换术(OUKR)的严重并发症,患者的危险因素包括胫骨小和胫骨内翻并胫骨内侧髁悬空。手术因素也影响骨折,但仍不明确。该有限元分析研究确定了OUKR术后TPF的手术危险因素,并确定了最佳胫骨部件定位,以最大限度地降低骨折风险。方法:对两例单侧膝关节有TPF而另一侧膝关节有良好结果的高危小双侧OUKR患者进行膝关节FE分析。每位患者未骨折的胫骨作为比较物来研究手术因素。从术前CT扫描中分割胫骨几何形状,并将胫骨部件植入其术后位置,建立FE模型。比较胫骨骨折和未骨折手术的中外侧位置、远端和近端位置、内外旋转和外翻方向。在两例患者中也建立了对侧TPF胫骨切除模型。通过检查最大主应力的大小和位置来评估TPF的风险。结果:在两例患者中,骨折胫骨和未骨折胫骨的胫骨构件的位置和朝向有很大差异,骨折胫骨的构件更多地位于内侧和远端。不理想的锯切导致胫骨部件定位不良,并在骨中产生非常高的局部应力,特别是在前面(患者1和2的骨折侧分别为157 MPa和702 MPa,而未骨折侧分别为49 MPa和63 MPa),导致骨折。结论:对于有明显胫骨内翻的小病人,手术是不可原谅的。为避免骨折,水平切口应保守,以3轴承为目标,垂直切口应靠近胫骨内侧脊柱的顶点,应避免极端的内旋或外旋。该组件应与后皮层对齐,不应悬于前方。此外,与目前的建议相反,胫骨假体应内翻(约5°)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology Chemical Engineering-Bioengineering
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
2270
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The translation of new discoveries in medicine to clinical routine has never been easy. During the second half of the last century, thanks to the progress in chemistry, biochemistry and pharmacology, we have seen the development and the application of a large number of drugs and devices aimed at the treatment of symptoms, blocking unwanted pathways and, in the case of infectious diseases, fighting the micro-organisms responsible. However, we are facing, today, a dramatic change in the therapeutic approach to pathologies and diseases. Indeed, the challenge of the present and the next decade is to fully restore the physiological status of the diseased organism and to completely regenerate tissue and organs when they are so seriously affected that treatments cannot be limited to the repression of symptoms or to the repair of damage. This is being made possible thanks to the major developments made in basic cell and molecular biology, including stem cell science, growth factor delivery, gene isolation and transfection, the advances in bioengineering and nanotechnology, including development of new biomaterials, biofabrication technologies and use of bioreactors, and the big improvements in diagnostic tools and imaging of cells, tissues and organs. In today`s world, an enhancement of communication between multidisciplinary experts, together with the promotion of joint projects and close collaborations among scientists, engineers, industry people, regulatory agencies and physicians are absolute requirements for the success of any attempt to develop and clinically apply a new biological therapy or an innovative device involving the collective use of biomaterials, cells and/or bioactive molecules. “Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology” aspires to be a forum for all people involved in the process by bridging the gap too often existing between a discovery in the basic sciences and its clinical application.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信