Aim: The Low Contact Stress (LCS) Total Knee Replacements (TKR) is a well-established mobile bearing prosthesis with more than 25 year experience, while the Kinemax Plus is a well established fixed bearing prosthesis. We examined whether reproducing the joint line height to within 5 mm of the pre-operative joint line height had any impact on the clinical outcome in the two different types of Total Knee Replacements.

Method: 48 consecutive LCS knee replacements with a minimum of 2 years follow up had their pre and postoperative joint line (using Figgie’s method) and range of movement (ROM) measured. We used the Oxford Knee Score as a clinical outcome measurement tool.

A cohort group of 53 CR Kinemax plus TKR from the Bristol Knee group was matched for age and sex. They had the same parameters measured.

Results: Accurate joint line restoration was achieved significantly more frequently (P< 0.05) in the Kinemax group. Better post-operative ROM also occurred in the Kinemax group than the LCS, p = 0.03 and the former produced a bigger gain in ROM p < 0.01. However, no difference in the Oxford Knee Score existed between the two prostheses, p = 0.28.

Joint line: elevation K+ LCS

0–2 mm (16/48) = 33% (26/53) = 49% 2–5 mm (14/48) = 29% (14/53) = 26%> 5 mm (18/48) = 38% (12/53) = 25%

There was no significant difference in the ROM or Oxford Knee Score when the joint line was not elevated versus elevated for each prosthesis. However, there was suggestion that the ROM in LCS might be more sensitive to joint line changes, although this was not significant.

ROM

K+ LCS

Normal joint line 116° 105°

Elevated joint line 108° 101°

Conclusion: Accurate joint line restoration could not be shown to correlate with either improved ROM or Oxford knee score; probably because of the small mount of elevation encountered and the small study size. There was a significantly greater post-operative increase in ROM with the Kinemax Plus relative to the LCS, and a significantly closer restoration of the joint line with the Kinemax Plus, both with respect to the actual measurement and with respect to the proportion of cases in which the joint line was accurately reproduced. This is surprising since in most K+ cases additional distal femur had been resected to avoid a tight knee. While in the LCS group special efforts had been made to achieve accurate restoration of the joint level.

Tibial fractures represent a heterogeneous group of fractures that are difficult to treat and vary widely in their time to union. Judging when it is safe to remove an external fixator or plaster cast requires clinical and radiological assessments both of which are subjective. Any errors in determining when a fracture has healed can lead to a prolonged treatment time or to refracture. Many methods have been employed to attempt to define clinical union in an objective manner including ultrasound, DEXA scanning, vibration analysis, and fracture stiffness measurements. Stiffness measurements are however time consuming to perform, of debatable clinical significance, and applicable only to fractures treated with external fixators. It has been previously observed^1,2 that weight bearing increases with time post-fracture. It has also been suggested³ that the ability of a patient to weight bear on the fractured limb is controlled by a biofeedback mechanism of biological self-control of fracture site strain that will be related to the stiffness of the fracture. We hypothesised that weight-bearing will be closely related to fracture healing and could be used as an alternative measure of healing where other objective measures of healing are not available or are impracticable.

A group of ten patients with tibial fractures treated by external fixation were studied. Using a Kistler force plate set into the floor, ground reaction forces for both lower limbs (fractured and non-fractured) were measured during normal walking at three weekly intervals. Concurrent fracture stiffness measurements were made using the Orthofix Orthometer.

In 8 patients who made good recoveries, the fixator was removed between 15–20 weeks post injury when the fracture stiffness had reached a minimum of 15 Nm/deg. Weight-bearing through the injured leg was seen to approach 90% of that through the uninjured leg in the 3 weeks prior to fixator removal. Two patients with delayed union achieved weight bearing of less than 40% of normal between 15–20 weeks. They also demonstrated low values of fracture stiffness (< 5 Nm/deg.) and subsequently required operative intervention to achieve union.

In this small study of 10 patients, weight bearing appears to correlate well with clinical union. It is quicker and easier to assess than stiffness and potentially has relevance to other fixation methods. We are continuing these measurements on conservatively treated, intra-medullary nailed, and externally fixed tibial fractures.