Comparison of in vivo kinematics of total knee arthroplasty between cruciate retaining and cruciate substituting insert

IF 1.5 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Keiji Iwamoto , Takaharu Yamazaki , Kazuomi Sugamoto , Tetsuya Tomita
{"title":"Comparison of in vivo kinematics of total knee arthroplasty between cruciate retaining and cruciate substituting insert","authors":"Keiji Iwamoto ,&nbsp;Takaharu Yamazaki ,&nbsp;Kazuomi Sugamoto ,&nbsp;Tetsuya Tomita","doi":"10.1016/j.asmart.2021.10.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The decision to choose cruciate retaining (CR) insert or cruciate substituting (CS) insert during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains a controversial issue. We hypothesized that there are different knee kinematics between CR and CS inserts and that a raised anterior lip design would offer a potential minimization of the paradoxical movement and provide joint stability. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare kinematics of a CR and CS TKA of the same single-radius design.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We investigated the in vivo knee kinematics of 20 knees with a CR TKA (10 knees in the CR insert and 10 knees in the CS insert). Patients were examined during deep knee flexion using fluoroscopy and femorotibial motion was determined using a 2- to 3-dimensional registration technique, which used computer-assisted design models to reproduce the spatial positions of the femoral and tibial components. We evaluated the knee range of motion (ROM), femoral axial rotation relative to the tibial component, anteroposterior translation, and kinematic pathway of the nearest point of the medial and lateral femoral condyles on the tibial tray.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The average ROM was 121.0 ± 17.3° in CR and 110.8 ± 12.4° in CS. The amount of femoral axial rotation was 7.2 ± 3.9° in CR, and 7.4 ± 2.7° in CS. No significant difference was observed in the amount of anterior translation between CR and CS. The CR and CS inserts had a similar kinematic pattern up to 100° flexion that was central pivot up to 70° flexion and then paradoxical anterior femoral movement until 100° flexion.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The present study demonstrated that there was no significant difference between the inserts in knee kinematics. These kinematic results suggested that the increased anterior lip could not control anterior movement in the CS insert.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44283,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Sport Medicine Arthroscopy Rehabilitation and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c9/06/main.PMC8521180.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Sport Medicine Arthroscopy Rehabilitation and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221468732100025X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background

The decision to choose cruciate retaining (CR) insert or cruciate substituting (CS) insert during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains a controversial issue. We hypothesized that there are different knee kinematics between CR and CS inserts and that a raised anterior lip design would offer a potential minimization of the paradoxical movement and provide joint stability. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare kinematics of a CR and CS TKA of the same single-radius design.

Methods

We investigated the in vivo knee kinematics of 20 knees with a CR TKA (10 knees in the CR insert and 10 knees in the CS insert). Patients were examined during deep knee flexion using fluoroscopy and femorotibial motion was determined using a 2- to 3-dimensional registration technique, which used computer-assisted design models to reproduce the spatial positions of the femoral and tibial components. We evaluated the knee range of motion (ROM), femoral axial rotation relative to the tibial component, anteroposterior translation, and kinematic pathway of the nearest point of the medial and lateral femoral condyles on the tibial tray.

Results

The average ROM was 121.0 ± 17.3° in CR and 110.8 ± 12.4° in CS. The amount of femoral axial rotation was 7.2 ± 3.9° in CR, and 7.4 ± 2.7° in CS. No significant difference was observed in the amount of anterior translation between CR and CS. The CR and CS inserts had a similar kinematic pattern up to 100° flexion that was central pivot up to 70° flexion and then paradoxical anterior femoral movement until 100° flexion.

Conclusion

The present study demonstrated that there was no significant difference between the inserts in knee kinematics. These kinematic results suggested that the increased anterior lip could not control anterior movement in the CS insert.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

全膝关节置换术中交叉关节保留与交叉关节置换假体的体内运动学比较
在全膝关节置换术(TKA)中,选择十字保留(CR)植入物还是十字替代(CS)植入物仍然是一个有争议的问题。我们假设在CR和CS植入物之间存在不同的膝关节运动学,升高的前唇设计将提供潜在的最小化矛盾运动并提供关节稳定性。本研究的目的是评估和比较相同单半径设计的CR和CS TKA的运动学。方法对20个膝关节(10个膝关节在CR假体中,10个膝关节在CS假体中)置入CR假体进行活体膝关节运动学研究。患者在膝关节深屈曲时使用透视检查,并使用2- 3维注册技术确定股胫骨运动,该技术使用计算机辅助设计模型来重现股骨和胫骨部件的空间位置。我们评估了膝关节活动范围(ROM)、股骨相对于胫骨组件的轴向旋转、前后移动以及胫骨托盘上股骨内侧和外侧髁最近点的运动路径。结果CR组平均ROM为121.0±17.3°,CS组平均ROM为110.8±12.4°。股骨轴向旋转量CR组为7.2±3.9°,CS组为7.4±2.7°。CR组与CS组的前平移量无显著差异。CR和CS插入物具有相似的运动模式,直到100°屈曲,即中心枢轴到70°屈曲,然后矛盾的股前运动直到100°屈曲。结论本研究表明,不同植入物在膝关节运动学方面无显著差异。这些运动学结果表明,增加的前唇不能控制CS插入体的前运动。
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
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
98 days
期刊介绍: The Asia-Pacific Journal of Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Rehabilitation and Technology (AP-SMART) is the official peer-reviewed, open access journal of the Asia-Pacific Knee, Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine Society (APKASS) and the Japanese Orthopaedic Society of Knee, Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine (JOSKAS). It is published quarterly, in January, April, July and October, by Elsevier. The mission of AP-SMART is to inspire clinicians, practitioners, scientists and engineers to work towards a common goal to improve quality of life in the international community. The Journal publishes original research, reviews, editorials, perspectives, and letters to the Editor. Multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines will be the trend in the coming decades. AP-SMART provides a platform for the exchange of new clinical and scientific information in the most precise and expeditious way to achieve timely dissemination of information and cross-fertilization of ideas.
×
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