We present a new technique for TKA implantation which utilizes patient-specific femoral and tibial positioning guides developed from MRI to offer an individualized approach to total knee replacement. This is a prospective non controlled study which aims to analyse the precision of this technique, its advantages and inconvenients in comparison with the conventional instrumented technique. The MRI provides a consistent three-dimensional data set of the patient's anatomy which allows for 3D axis identification. The ideal position and sizing is performed by the surgeon on this 3D model and the patient specific guides are manufactured in advance in order to reproduce the bone cuts corresponding to this positioning and implant size. There are no intramedullary nor extramedullary instruments during the surgery. We compared 20 patients operated with this technique with 20 patients operated with the conventional technique. The hypothesis was a difference < 2° between the 2 techniques The measured parameters were: HKS, HKA, tibial slope, femoral rotation on CT Duration, bleeding, pain on VAS and morphine consumption, active flexion, KSS, Oxford score, recovery of independant walking and delay of return to home. Both groups were identical for gender, age, BMI, etiology, comorbidities, pain and rehabilitation protocols.Material
Method
This study aims to compare the gait pattern of patients operated with a TKA versus a normal population in order to evaluate if the excellent function of TKA reported in the literature corresponds to objectively measured parameters. 20 patients operated of TKA with a follow up >
1 year, all patients rated with a very good functional result (Knee Society Knee score >
85/100 – VAS <
= 1/10) were compared with a group of 20 “ normal” persons. The study was blind: the examiner did not know whether the person was a normal, or which knee was operated. The test consisted in an 11 meters walk, on an AMTI force platform; the movements of the body were recorded with 6 IR cameras and analysed with the “Motion Analysis” software. The implant was a mobile bearing AP stabilised knee. The measured parameters were kinematic : speed, step length, flexion angle, duration of stance /WB phase and dynamic : flexion/extension, varus/valgus, internal/ external moments and resultant force direction. When matched with age and BMI, all kinematic parameters of the TKA group are equal to that of the normals. However, dynamic parameters differ significantly between both groups: At the end of stance phase and heel strike the operated patients have a lack of extension of 10° despite a clinical measurement of full extension (0°) In the frontal plane, all patients exhibited a valgus walking pattern but the mechanical axis measured on long standing radiographs was 180°+/−1°. In the horizontal plane, all operated patients had an external rotation of +8° compared to the normals. Despite excellent clinical scores and radiologic positioning, gait analysis demonstrates important dynamic differences between the TKA and the normal group. The extension lag at heel strike may be related to either quad weakness, or an insufficient extension gap at surgery; The valgus resultant pattern occurs despite a perfect alignment of the mechanical axis (180°) on the operated patients: this rises the question whether this alignment is the goal or if an undercorrection would be more physiologic. External rotation is superior to the normal group : it is in relation with the external rotation of the femoral and tibial components. Conclusion. Gait analysis of the TKA group of patients compared to normal demonstrates important dynamic differences in relation with the surgical positioning of the implant.
This is a prospective gait laboratory case matched cohort study of patients after total knee arthroplasty. 20 patients who had TKA with a good functional result and a follow-up superior to 2 years were compared with 20 “normal” knees. The examiners were blinded to the group. A standardized gait analysis was performed, measuring gait kinematics, kinetics and force plate recordings using Motion Analysis computer software. All patients had a single surgeon and the same brand mobile bearing platform. The kinematics parameters were identical in both groups However the dynamic parameters showed a statistically significant difference At terminal swing and heel strike the operated patients had a 10-degree extension deficit in their gait analysis, despite of the fact that clinically all patients had a full extension with no quadriceps lag. The coronal plane kinetics of TKA showed valgus moment in stance despite having radiological normal (180° +/−1°) mechanical axis. (p<
0,02) In the axial plane, all operated patients had an external rotation moment greater than normals. (p<
0,01) Despite good clinical ROM and quadriceps strength, the TKA demonstrated a lack of extension in early stance. This may be due to insufficient extension gap at surgery. The valgus resultant pattern poses a more challenging question: Are we aiming for the wrong goals in the mechanical axis, or should we consider undercorrection? Gait analysis of the TKA patients compared to normals demonstrates dynamic differences in relation with the surgical positioning of the implant.
Which parameters are related with a forgotten knee after TKA? The operated knee was said forgotten when it was similar to the normal controlateral knee in all situations. When a restriction existed, the knee was considered as not forgotten. 470 patients operated with a stabilised mobile bearing knee were examined with a minimal follow up of 5 years and answered to this question. 4 groups of parameters: patient, prosthesis, surgery and post operative care were compared to the binary answer to the forgotten knee question. 48% of the patients had a forgotten knee one year after the TKA; The following factors had a significant negative correlation with the forgotten knee:
low SF12 psychological profile; Patellofemoral dysplasic arthritis (p = 0,01); femoral oversizing (p=0,001); tight extension gap, femoral lengthening, tourniquet time; overcorrection superior to 2°(p = 0,02). We found no correlation between the following factors and the forgotten knees:
gender, BMI, approach, cemented or not, patellar resurfacing; preoperative Oxford and Knee Society knee scores; The forgotten knee is a simple objective clinical item because the answer to the question is binary and does not accept any unprecision. It is highly correlated with surgical scores and patients expectation scores (p = 0,0001). The forgotten knee is a painless and asymptomatic knee identical to a normal knee. Surgical factors have the highest infiuence on this parameter compared to patient or prosthetic related factors.
The ROCC® prosthesis is a stabilised posterior cruciate ligament-sacrificing rotating mobile bearing knee. It contains a press-moulded polyethylene insert (Arcom®). It has high coronal conformity during gait and lift-off, and sagittal conformity during the weight-bearing phase. It also has a central concave-convex saddle-horse stabilisation mechanism with a progressive stop. Preferential gliding kinematics optimise the wear factor. A deep anatomical trochlea permits good patellar tracking at every degree of flexion with both resurfaced and unresurfaced patellae. The tibiofemoral displacement of the prosthesis approximates normality. In 175 primary TKAs with the ROCC® knee, at two-year follow-up the objective measurement of pain was 8.7 out of 10 (7 to 10) in 94% of patients. In 89% of patients, the range of flexion was 128° (95° to 145°). At 3 months, the Knee Society Score was 175 in 87% of patients (function score 80), at 6 months 185 in 89% of patients (function score 90) and at 12 months 200 in 94% of patients (function score 100). In 98% the femoral component was not cemented and there were no femoral radiolucent lines. The tibial component was not cemented in 30% and two patients in this group needed revision for loosening of the tibial plateau. There were no complications such as persistent pain, flexion contracture, Sudeck’s syndrome, instability or dislocation. Mechanical tests did not show any wear or cold flow deformation of the polyethylene insert after 3 million cycles.
- posterior stabilised prosthesis with a fixed plateau, toric trochlea, cemented dome patella (n=10); - TKA with a rotating platform, 2-facet trochlae, rotatory congruent patella (n=10); - TKA with a rotating platform, 2-facet trochale, without resurfacing (n=10); - TKA with a rotating platform, hollow anatomic trochlae (n=10). The following parameters were studied prospectively:
- pain assessed on a visual analogue scale; - clinical assessment of going up and down stairs (normal, step-by-step, with handrail); - kinematic assessment of active flexion extension (0°–120°) during which the position of the patella was measured in the three planes and the trajectory of the patella was noted in comparison with the healthy side and with the moment of the quadriceps; - efficacy of the quadriceps (Cibex).
- TKAs with a dome patella and those with an anatomic patella; - TKAs with an anatomic trochlae and those with a hollow trochlae; This difference basically involved the patellar tilt, lateral subluxation of the patella, and especially, the patellar trajectory between 20° and 90°, the toric trochlae with a dome patella having a more anterior trajectory than the normal knee. The clinical and functional study showed that:
- the percentage of totally pain-free femoropatellar articulations was higher for the hollow anatomic trochlae (96%) than for the three other types (75%) (p = 0.04); - the stairs function was better for all the anatomic trochlae compared with the dome trochlae (p = 0.05); - the efficacy of the quadriceps was the same for the four types of TKA.