Complications of the patellofemoral (PF) joint remain a common cause for revision of total knee replacements. PF complications, such as patellar maltracking, subluxation, dislocation and implant failure, have been linked to femoral and patellar component alignment. Computational analyses represent an efficient method for investigating the effects of patellar and femoral component alignment and loading on output measures related to long term clinical success (i.e. kinematics, contact mechanics) and can be utilized to make direct comparisons between common patellar component design types. Prior PF alignment studies have generally involved perturbing a single alignment parameter independently, without accounting for interaction effects between multiple parameters. The objective of the current study was to determine critical alignment parameters, and combinations of parameters, in three patellar component designs, and assess whether the critical parameters were design specific.

A dynamic finite element (FE) model of an implanted PF joint was applied in conjunction with a 100-trial Monte Carlo probabilistic simulation to establish relationships between alignment and loading parameters and PF kinematics, contact mechanics and internal stresses (Figure 1). Seven parameters, including femoral internal-external (I-E) alignment, patellar I-E, flexion-extension (F∗∗∗∗∗E) and adduction-abduction (A-A) rotational alignment, and patellar medial-lateral (M-L) and superior-inferior (S-I) translational alignment, as well as percentage of the quadriceps load on the vastus medialis obliquus (VMO) tendon, were perturbed in the probabilistic analysis. Ten output parameters, including 6-DOF PF kinematics, peak PF contact pressure, contact area, peak von Mises stress and M-L force due to contact, were evaluated at 80 intervals during a simulated deep knee bend. Three types of patellar component designs were assessed; a dome-compatible patellar component (dome), a medialized dome-compatible patellar component (modified dome), and an anatomic component (anatomic). Model-predicted bounds at 5 and 95% confidence levels were determined for each output parameter throughout the range of femoral flexion (Figure 2). Traditional sensitivity analysis, in addition to a previously described coupled probabilistic and principal component analysis (probabilistic-PCA) approach, were applied to determine the relative importance of alignment and loading parameters to knee mechanics in each of the three designs.

The dome component demonstrated the least amount of variation in contact mechanics and internal stresses, particularly in the 30–100° flexion range, with respect to alignment and loading variability. The modified dome had substantially reduced M-L contact force when compared with the dome. The anatomic design, while wide bounds of variability were predicted, had consistently greater contact area and lowered contact pressure than the dome and modified dome designs. The anatomic design also reproduced more natural sagittal plane patellar tilt than the other components. All three designs were most sensitivity to femoral I-E alignment. Thereafter, sensitivity to component alignment was design specific; for the anatomic component, the main alignment parameter was F-E, while for the domed components it was a combination of F-E and translation (M-L and S-I) (Figure 3). Understanding the relationships and design-specific dependencies between alignment parameters can add value to surgical pre-operative planning, and may help focus instrumentation design on those alignment parameters of primary concern.