Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 11/2013

01-11-2013 | Knee

Anteroposterior and rotational stability in fixed and mobile bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a cadaveric study using the robotic force sensor system

Authors: Roland Becker, Christian Mauer, Christian Stärke, Mathias Brosz, Thore Zantop, Christoph H. Lohmann, Martin Schulze

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 11/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Different bearing designs in unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) have been developed in order to influence the rate of polyethylene wear. Increased anteroposterior translation and rotation after UKA has been hypothesized due to changes in joint surface geometry. The mobile bearing design was expected to show increased anteroposterior translation compared to the fixed bearing and biconcave bearing design.

Methods

Six human cadaver knees were used for the tests. Anteroposterior and rotational knee stability was analysed in 0°, 30°, 60°, 90° and 120° of knee flexion using a robotic testing system (KR 125, KUKA Robots Augsburg, Germany). Three forces and moments were measured in a Cartesian coordinate system with a resolution of 1.0 N and 0.1 Nm.

Results

There was no difference between the native knees and the knees after UKA in AP translation and rotation in all knee flexion angles. The factor knee flexion angle had a significant impact on the anterior translation when the type of bearing was neglected (p ≤ 0.015).

Conclusion

This study shows that the natural knee stability in AP translation and rotation can be preserved in UKA. The preserved knee stability in different planes after UKA underlines the advantage of UKA when surgery is required in osteoarthritic changes of the medial compartment.
Literature
1.
Allen CR, Wong EK, Livesay GA, Sakane M, Fu FH, Woo SL (2000) Importance of the medial meniscus in the anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knee. J Orthop Res 18:109–115PubMedCrossRef
2.
Argenson JN, Komistek RD, Aubaniac JM, Dennis DA, Northcut EJ, Anderson DT, Agostini S (2002) In vivo determination of knee kinematics for subjects implanted with a unicompartmental arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 17:1049–1054CrossRef
3.
Bartley RE, Stulberg SD, Robb WJ, Sweeney HJ (1994) Polyethylene wear in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 299:18–24PubMed
4.
Campbell DG, Johnson LJ, West SC (2006) Multiparameter quantitative computer-assisted tomography assessment of unicompartmental knee arthroplasties. ANZ J Surg 76:782–787PubMedCrossRef
5.
Casino D, Martelli S, Zaffagnini S, Lopomo N, Iacono F, Bignozzi S, Visani A, Marcacci M (2009) Knee stability before and after total and unicondylar knee replacement: in vivo kinematic evaluation utilizing navigation. J Orthop Res 27:202–207PubMedCrossRef
6.
Collier MB, Engh CA, McAuley JP, Engh GA (2007) Factors associated with the loss of thickness of polyethylene tibial bearings after knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:1306–1314PubMedCrossRef
7.
Freeman MA, Pinskerova V (2005) The movement of the normal tibio-femoral joint. J Biomech 38:197–208PubMedCrossRef
8.
Goodfellow JW, O’Connor J (1986) Clinical results of the Oxford knee. Surface arthroplasty of the tibiofemoral joint with a meniscal bearing prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 205:21–42PubMed
9.
Griffin T, Rowden N, Morgan D, Atkinson R, Woodruff P, Maddern G (2007) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment of unicompartmental osteoarthritis: a systematic study. ANZ J Surg 77:214–221PubMedCrossRef
10.
Harner CD, Mauro CS, Lesniak BP, Romanowski JR (2009) Biomechanical consequences of a tear of the posterior root of the medial meniscus. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91(Suppl 2):257–270PubMed
11.
Heinert G, Kendoff D, Preiss S, Gehrke T, Sussmann P (2011) Patellofemoral kinematics in mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing posterior stabilised total knee replacements: a cadaveric study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:967–972PubMedCrossRef
12.
Hopper GP, Leach WJ (2008) Participation in sporting activities following knee replacement: total versus unicompartmental. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16:973–979PubMedCrossRef
13.
Iwaki H, Pinskerova V, Freeman MA (2000) Tibiofemoral movement 1: the shapes and relative movements of the femur and tibia in the unloaded cadaver knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82:1189–1195PubMedCrossRef
14.
Kaya Bicer E, Servien E, Lustig S, Demey G, Ait Si Selmi T, Neyret P (2010) Sagittal flexion angle of the femoral component in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: is it same for both medial and lateral UKAs? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:928–933PubMedCrossRef
15.
Kort NP, van Raay JJ, Cheung J, Jolink C, Deutman R (2007) Analysis of Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement using the minimally invasive technique in patients aged 60 and above: an independent prospective series. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15:1331–1334PubMedCrossRef
16.
Kretzer JP, Jakubowitz E, Reinders J, Lietz E, Moradi B, Hofmann K, Sonntag R (2011) Wear analysis of unicondylar mobile bearing and fixed bearing knee systems: a knee simulator study. Acta Biomater 7:710–715PubMedCrossRef
17.
Levy IM, Torzilli PA, Gould JD, Warren RF (1989) The effect of lateral meniscectomy on motion of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 71:401–406PubMed
18.
Levy IM, Torzilli PA, Warren RF (1982) The effect of medial meniscectomy on anterior-posterior motion of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 64:883–888PubMed
19.
Li G (2005) In vivo articular cartilage contact kinematics of the knee: an investigation using dual-orthogonal fluoroscopy and magnetic resonance image-based computer models. Am J Sports Med 33:102–107PubMedCrossRef
20.
Lyons MC, MacDonald SJ, Somerville LE, Naudie DD, McCalden RW (2012) Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty database analysis: is there a winner? Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:84–90PubMedCrossRef
21.
Machner A, Pap G, Awiszus F (2002) Evaluation of quadriceps strength and voluntary activation after unicompartmental arthroplasty for medial osteoarthritis of the knee. J Orthop Res 20:108–111PubMedCrossRef
22.
Paletta GA, Manning T, Snell E, Parker R, Bergfeld J (1997) The effect of allograft meniscal replacement on intraarticular contact area and pressures in the human knee. A biomechanical study. Am J Sports Med 25:692–698PubMedCrossRef
23.
Pandit H, Jenkins C, Beard DJ, Price AJ, Gill HS, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2010) Mobile bearing dislocation in lateral unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee 17:392–397PubMedCrossRef
24.
Papageorgiou CD, Gil JE, Kanamori A, Fenwick JA, Woo SL, Fu FH (2001) The biomechanical interdependence between the anterior cruciate ligament replacement graft and the medial meniscus. Am J Sports Med 29:226–231PubMed
25.
Price AJ, Rees JL, Beard DJ, Gill RHS, Dodd CAF, Murray DM (2004) Sagittal plane kinematics of a mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at 10 years: a comparative in vivo fluoroscopic analysis1. J Arthroplasty 19:590–597PubMedCrossRef
26.
Robinson BJ, Rees JL, Price AJ, Beard DJ, Murray DW, McLardy Smith P, Dodd CA (2002) Dislocation of the bearing of the Oxford lateral unicompartmental arthroplasty. A radiological assessment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84:653–657PubMedCrossRef
27.
28.
Suggs JF, Li G, Park SE, Sultan PG, Rubash HE, Freiberg AA (2006) Knee biomechanics after UKA and its relation to the ACL—a robotic investigation. J Orthop Res 24:588–594PubMedCrossRef
29.
Victor J, Labey L, Wong P, Innocenti B, Bellemans J (2010) The influence of muscle load on tibiofemoral knee kinematics. J Orthop Res 28:419–428PubMed
30.
Weston-Simons JS, Pandit H, Gill HS, Jackson WF, Price AJ, Dodd CA, Murray DW (2011) The management of mobile bearing dislocation in the Oxford lateral unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:2023–2026PubMedCrossRef
31.
Whittaker JP, Naudie DD, McAuley JP, McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ, Bourne RB (2010) Does bearing design influence midterm survivorship of unicompartmental arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:73–81PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Anteroposterior and rotational stability in fixed and mobile bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a cadaveric study using the robotic force sensor system
Authors
Roland Becker
Christian Mauer
Christian Stärke
Mathias Brosz
Thore Zantop
Christoph H. Lohmann
Martin Schulze
Publication date
01-11-2013
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 11/2013
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2157-5

Other articles of this Issue 11/2013

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 11/2013 Go to the issue

Knee

Cam impingement of the posterior femoral condyle in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Knee

Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty is affected by their general physical well-being

Knee

Bicompartmental knee arthroplasty of the patellofemoral and medial compartments

Knee

Reliability of the 6-min walk test after total knee arthroplasty

Knee

Is bicompartmental knee arthroplasty more favourable to knee muscle strength and physical performance compared to total knee arthroplasty?

Knee

An uncommon cause of cemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty failure: fracture of metallic components