Background. The aim of this study was to evaluate causes and results of revision surgery in
Instability accounts for approximately 20% of revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) operations, however, diagnostic tests remain relatively subjective. The aim of this examination was to evaluate the feasibility of using pressure mat analyses during functional tasks to identify abnormal biomechanics associated with TKA instability. Five patients (M = 4; age = 69.80±7.05 years; weight = 79.73±20.12 kg) with suspected TKA instability were examined compared to 10 healthy controls (M = 4; age = 44.6±7.52 years; weight = 70.80±14.65). Peak pressure and time parameters were measured during normal gait and two-minute bilateral stance. Side-to-side pressure distribution was calculated over 10-second intervals during the second minute. Mann-Whitney tests compared loading parameters between groups and side-to-side differences in TKA patients (significance level = p<0.05). Pressure distribution was expressed relative to bodyweight. Notable differences were seen during bilateral stance. Uneven side loading was greater – favouring the non-operated limb – in TKA patients during bilateral stance compared to controls. This was significantly different at 30s (p=0.0336) and 60s (p=0.0336). Gait analyses showed subtle pressure distribution differences in
Instability accounts for approximately 20% of all revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA), however diagnostic tests remain crude and subjective. The aim of this examination was to evaluate the feasibility of pressure mat (SB Mat, TekScan) analyses of functional tasks to differentiate instability in a clinical setting. Five patients (M = 4; age = 69.80±7.05 years; weight = 79.73±20.12 kg) with suspected TKA instability were examined compared to five healthy controls (M = 1; age = 46.80±7.85 years; weight = 71.54±16.17 kg). Peak pressure and time parameters were measured during normal gait and two-minute bilateral stance. Side-to-side pressure distribution was calculated over 10-second intervals during the second minute. Pressure distributions were expressed relative to bodyweight (%BW). T-tests compared loading parameters between groups (significance level = p<0.05). Analyses showed subtle differences in pressure distribution in
Background:. To evaluate causes and results of revision arthroplasties in
Stability after TKA is essential for knee function and patient satisfaction. Stability may be marginally more important even than alignment because “stability” means there will be ONE alignment, whereas INSTABILITY means there will be many alignments of the joint, usually the worst one for any loading pattern. Whereas alignment results from the orientation and size of implants, stability depends on all of these, plus soft tissue integrity and in many cases, surgical alteration. Ligament releases (and rarely reconstructions) will certainly be required if alignment is changed with the arthroplasty. Instability may be a subtle or flagrant problem. The “Instabilities” are:
. i. Varus- valgus. ii. Plane of motion- Flexion. iii. Plane of Motion-Extension. Varus-valgus instability is the prototype and while it may originate exclusively from the failure of soft tissue, knee alignment and dynamic forces outside the knee joint such as hip abductor dysfunction, scoliois and tibialis posterior rupture may be implicated. A comprehensive approach will be needed. Flexion instability, most simply stated results from a flexion gap that exceeds the dimensions of the extension gap. It will result most commonly after surgery for the patient with a fixed flexion contracture whose knee extends fully because a relatively thin polyethylene insert has been selected. So-called “mid-flexion” instability (implying stability in extension and flexion) has not yet been thoroughly characterised. Extension instability includes all failures of the extensor mechanism (rupture, maltracking and weakness) which are better characterised as “buckling” under a separate topic. Recurvatum has received little attention but can generate the most destructive forces leading to knee arthroplasty failure. In general begins as a compensatory mechanism for relative extensor weakness. All treatment of the