WHY DO RADIOLUCENCIES APPEAR AT THE TRAY WALL FOLLOWING PARTIAL KNEE REPLACEMENT?

Abstract

Introduction: Partial Knee Replacement (PKR) is an appealing alternative to Total Knee Replacement (TKR) when the patient has isolated compartment osteoarthritis (OA). In nearly all cases there is a radiolucency observed between the tibial tray wall and the boney interface. The reasons why radiolucencies appear are unknown, but the bone will adapt to its altered mechanical environment by bone remodelling in accordance with ‘Wollf’s Law’. The aim of this study was to investigate the mechanical environment of the tibia bone adjacent to the tray wall, following cemented and cementless PKR, in order to determine whether this region of bone resorbs.

Methods: A validated finite element (FE) model of a cadaver tibia implanted with an Oxford PKR was used in this study. Kinematic data from fluoroscopy measurements during a step-up activity were used to determine the relative tibio-femoral positioning for the Oxford PKR model. Load data were adapted from the in-vivo measured loads using an instrumented implant during a step-up activity. The standard operating protocol was simulated for the Oxford PKR FE models, with the tibial tray implanted in a neutral position. The tibia was sectioned around the tray. Zone 7 was defined as parallel to the vertical tray wall, corresponding to the region on screened x-rays where radiolucencies are observed. It was assumed that the bone in the implanted tibia will attempt to normalise its stress-strain patterns locally to its equilibrium state, the intact tibia, for the same loading conditions. Forty patients (20 cemented, 20 cementless) who had undergone PKR were randomly selected from a database, and their screened x-rays assessed for radiolucency in region 7.

Results: The SED in region 7 was 80% lower in the cemented and cementless tibia, compared to the intact tibia (Figure 2). The maximum tensile stress was 63% lower in the cemented and cementless tibia, compared to the intact tibia. The corresponding maximum compressive stress was 52% lower. Radiolucency was observed in all forty radiographs in region 7.

Discussion: After implantation with a cemented or cementless PKR the bone strains and SED in region 7 are reduced. This reduction may provide the signal for adaptive bone remodelling and bone will be resorbed from this region, decreasing the volume and increasing the SED. Bone resorption will continue until the equilibrium state is reached. If a ‘lazy’ zone between 35% and 50% of the remodelling signal is considered, bone resorption will still occur due to the large decrease in SED for this region. For region 7 to return its SED to the equilibrium state, its volume will need to be reduced by 80%. This is likely to be the reason why a radiolucency is observed clinically in this region in almost every case, whether a cemented or cementless implant is used.