Abstract
Background
Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgical techniques attempt to achieve equal flexion and extension gaps to produce a well-balanced knee. Anterior knee pain, which is not addressed by flexion-extension balancing, is one of the more common complaints for TKA patients. The variation in patellofemoral balance resulting from the techniques to achieve equal flexion and extension gaps has not been widely studied.
Purpose of study
The purpose of the study is to determine the effects on cruciate retaining (CR) TKA patellofemoral balance when equal flexion and extension gaps are maintained while changing femur implant size and/or adjusting the femur and tibia implant proximal -distal and femur anterior-posterior positions.
Methods
A computational analysis was performed simulating knee flexion of two CR TKA designs (JOURNEY II CR and LEGION HFCR; Smith & Nephew) using previously validated software (LifeMOD/KneeSim; LifeModeler). Deviations from the ideal implant position were simulated by adjusting tibiofemoral proximal-distal position and femur anterior-posterior position and size (Table 1). Positioning the femur more proximal was accompanied by equal anterior femur and proximal tibia shifts to maintain equal flexion and extension gaps. The forces in the medial and lateral retinaculum were collected and summed at every 15° knee flexion up to 135° to determine the total patellofemoral retinaculum load which was analyzed versus proximal-distal implant position, implant size, implant design, and knee flexion using an ANOVA in Minitab 16 (Minitab).
Results
Patellofemoral retinaculum load was significantly affected by proximal-distal implant position, implant size, and knee flexion angle (p<.001) but was not significantly affected by implant design (p>0.2). Interactions with knee flexion angle were significant for both proximal-distal implant position (p<.001) and implant size (p=.003) indicating that their effects change with knee flexion (Figures 1 and 2). For 15°–30° knee flexion, more proximal tibiofemoral positions corresponding to a more anterior femur increased patellofemoral retinaculum load. Implant position had little effect at 45° knee flexion. For 60°–135° knee flexion, more proximal implant positions decreased patellofemoral retinaculum load. Increased femoral size caused increased patellofemoral retinaculum load with a larger effect for 15–45° knee flexion.
Conclusions
Our results indicate that patellofemoral balance should be considered when selecting implant size and position for flexion-extension balancing. The more common adjustment of positioning implants more proximal decreases patellofemoral retinaculum load in flexion, but the anterior femoral shift to balance the flexion space overstuffs the patella near extension. Downsizing the femoral implant is an option to mitigate increased patellofemoral retinaculum load when shifting the femoral anterior.
For figures/tables, please contact authors directly.
