Abstract
INTRODUCTION
Patellofemoral joint (PFJ) replacement is a successful treatment option for isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis. With this approach only the involved joint compartment is replaced and the femoro-tibial joint remains intact. Minimizing periprosthetic bone loss, which may occur due to the stress shielding effect of the femoral component, is important to insure long-term outcomes. The objective of this study was to investigate, using finite element analyses, the effects of patellofemoral replacement on the expected stress distribution of the distal femur eventually leading to changes in bone density.
METHODS
MRI images of a healthy knee were acquired, segmented and reconstructed into a 3D physiological model of the bony and cartilaginous geometries of distal femur and patella with patellar tendon and insertion of the quadriceps tendon. This model was modified to include PFJ replacements with either a Journey PFJ or a Richards II PFJ prosthesis, and a Genesis II TKA (Smith&Nephew, Memphis, TN). The prosthetic components were incorporated in the intact model based on the manufacturer's instructions or previously described surgical techniques (Figure 1).
Cortical bone was modeled with orthotropic properties, while homogeneous linear isotropic elasticity was assumed for trabecular bone, cartilage, cement and femoral components materials. The patellar tendon was given Neo-Hookean behavior. UHMWPE patellar buttons for all designs were assigned non-linear elasto-plastic material.
The simulated motion consisted of a 10 second loaded squat, starting from 0° until a flexion angle of 120° matching experimental kinematics tests performed in previous in-vitro analysis on physiological cadaveric legs [1-2]. The patella model was constrained fixing the distal part of the patellar ligament and applying a quadriceps force distributed on the quadriceps insertion on the proximal surface of the patella.
During the dynamic simulation the average Von Mises stress was calculated in two regions of interest (ROI) defined in the femoral bone: one anterior and one proximal. The location of the ROIs was defined to fit the same regions as used in a previous bone mineral density analysis following patellofemoral arthroplasty (height 1cm, length 1cm).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Overall, the average bone stresses in both ROIs increased with flexion angle. Maximal stresses during squat were reached at 90° flexion angle, (2.8–3.8 MPa for the anterior ROI and 1.4–1.6 MPa for the proximal ROI). Mean stresses in the proximal ROI were similar for both PFJ designs and the physiological model, and slightly lower for the TKA. Between 80° and 120°, anterior ROI bone stresses for Journey PFJ design were comparable to the physiological knee, while reduced by almost 25% for the other designs (Figure 1).
These results suggest a different stress-shielding behavior depending on design geometry and material properties.
CONCLUSIONS
This study evaluated periprosthetic bone stress distributions of different patellofemoral replacements. The numerical analyses of physiological and replaced knee models predicted a decrease in stress behind the anterior flange of the femoral component for some designs. This reduction was dependent on prosthesis design geometry and materials properties.
