Introduction. A bicruciate retaining (BCR) TKA is thought to maintain a closer resemblance to the native knee kinematics compared to a posterior cruciate retaining (CR) TKA. With BCR TKAs retainment of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) facilitates proprioception and balance which is thought to lead to more natural knee kinematics and increased functional outcome. The aim of this study was to quantify and compare the kinematics of a BCR and CR TKA during functional tests. Materials and Methods. In this patient-blinded randomized controlled trial, a total of 40 patients with knee osteoarthritis were included, 18 of them received a BCR TKA (Vanguard XP, Zimmer-Biomet) and 22 received a CR TKA (Vanguard CR, Zimmer-Biomet). Fluoroscopic analysis was done 1 year post-operatively. The main outcome was posterior femoral rollback (i.e. translation of the femorotibial contact point (CP)) of the BCR and CR TKA during a step-up test. Secondary, the kinematics during a lunge test were quantified as anterior-posterior (AP) translation of the femorotibial CP. Independent student t-tests (or non-parametric equivalent) were used to analyze the effect of BCR versus CR TKA on these measures, to correct for the multiple testing problem post-hoc Bonferroni-Holm corrections were applied. Results. The mean AP CP for the BCR implant was not significantly different from the CR implant in the medial compartment (Figure 1, left). However, laterally the BCR implant shows a more posterior CP during late extension i.e. from 30° flexion to 0° extension (Figure 1, right). Figure 2 shows the AP CP during the final extension phase (30° flexion to 0° extension) of the step-up task for both implants on the tibia plateau. While the CR TKA remains mostly stable throughout this phase, the BCR TKA shows tibial internal rotation from 30° to 10° and tibial external rotation in the final extension phase: a kinematic pattern comparable to the natural knee's screw home mechanism. The lateral AP CP of the BCR TKA is more posterior compared to the CR TKA during the whole lunge task (Figure 3, right) the medial CP is more anterior in the 0–30° flexion (Figure 3, left). The main differences between the implants during the lunge task are observable in the early flexion phase, which is in line with ACL function. Conclusion. These preliminary results suggest that the kinematics of the BCR implant reproduces the natural screw-home mechanism in early flexion/late extension. The difference between the BCR and CR implants is mostly visible in the flexion phase in which the ACL is effective, which is in congruency with the absence of the ACL in CR TKAs. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Background. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was primarily considered a successful procedure, several new knee implants were introduced in recent years that seek to obtain improved stability and higher flexion. One of the implant, Vanguard XP. TM. BiCruciate retaining (BCR), Zinmmer-Biomet, USA recreates a specific kinematic model through the principle of normal joint. Patients and Method. An unselected consecutive series of sixty-two patients undergoing primary TKA using the cemented total knee system between August 2016 and April 2018 were studied. Twenty-seven knees was operated using Vanguard XP, subsequently thirty-five knees were received a TKA using cruciate retaining cemented total knee system FINE. TM. CR, Nakashimamedical, Japan. Postoperatively standing AP hip-to-ankle radiographs were obtained, from which the lower extremity mechanical axis, component angle were measured. The alignment goals were a neutral mechanical axis defined as a hip-to-ankle angle of 0°with the femoral and tibial components aligned perpendicular to the mechanical axis. The total operating time were quantified utilising an operating room database. The total operating time between TKAs performed with Vanguard XP BCR and those performed with FINE CR was compared in each group. All patients postoperatively was evaluated of clinical results the Japan Orthopedics Association(JOA) Knee scores. We evaluated femoral component posterior offset (PFCO) in both of two group. The maximal protrusion of the posterior condyle, posteriorly to the extension line parallel to the tibial shaft from the edge of the posterior tibial component was measured on true lateral radiographs. Results. The JOA Knee score of Vanguard XP BCR group was 86.5±4.7 points, and the score of FINE group was 82.7±5.9 points, there was no statistical significance between the two groups on the clinical score. The operative time in Vanguard XP BCR was 137.2±14.6 minutes and significantly more compared to the time of FINE group 111.3±11.9 minutes. The mechanical axis angle in Vanguard XP BCR group was −1.3°±2.7, while FINE CR group was −0.7°±3.2, there was no statistical significance. The number of outliers for mechanical axis angle was Vanguard XP BCR group 25%, the FINE group 24%, between the two groups there was no statistical significance. The mean value of the femoral component posterior offset ratio of Vanguard XP BCR was 14.4%±0.1. The mean value of the posterior offset ratio of FINE group was 16.7%±0.1, between the two groups there was statistical significance. Discussion. Bellemans et al. first defined the concept of posterior condylar offset. They demonstrated that the maximum active flexion possible was limited by direct impingement of the posterior aspect of the tibial component against the posterior aspect of the femur. However, the offset also reduces the extension gap. An enlarged posterior femoral component may reduce the extension gap due to posterior tissue tightness. In this study, the femoral component posterior offset ratio of Vanguard XP BCR was good results compared to the CR type FINE. Clinical results and the mechanical axis angle was good both of the group, but the operative time in Vanguard XP BCR was significantly more compared to the time of FINE group. Conclusion. Good early clinical results were obtained with Vanguard XP BCR knee implant, long-term follow-up studies are needed to confirm our findings

Background. While posterior cruciate retaining (PCR) implants are a more common total knee arthroplasty (TKA) design, newer bi-cruciate retaining (BCR) TKAs are now being considered as an option for many patients, especially those that are younger. While PCR TKAs remove the ACL, the BCR TKA designs keep both cruciate ligaments intact, as it is believed that the resection of the ACL greatly affects the overall kinematic patterns of TKA designs. Various fluoroscopic studies have focused on determination of kinematics but haven't defined differentiators that affect motion patterns. This research study assesses the importance of the cruciate ligaments and femoral geometry for Bi-Cruciate Retaining (BCR) and Posterior Cruciate Retaining (PCR) TKAs having the same femoral component, compared to the normal knee. Methods. The in vivo 3D kinematics were determined for 40 subjects having a PCR TKA, 10 having a BCR TKA, and 10 having a normal knee, in a retrospective study. All TKA subjects had the same femoral component. All subjects performed a deep knee bend under fluoroscopic surveillance. The kinematics were determined during early flexion (ACL dominant), mid flexion (ACL/PCL transition) and deep flexion (PCL dominant). Results. During the first 30 degrees of flexion, the ACL played an important role, as subjects having a BCR TKA experienced kinematic patterns more similar to the normal knee. During mid flexion, both TKAs experienced random kinematic patterns, which could be due to the ACL and PCL being less active or resected in PCR TKA. In deeper flexion, both TKAs experienced kinematic patterns similar to the normal knee, thus supporting the assumption that the PCL played a dominant role [Fig. 1, Fig. 2]. All three groups generally experienced progressive axial rotation throughout flexion [Fig. 3]. On average, subjects having a PCR TKA experienced 112.3° of flexion, which was greater than the BCR subjects. Conclusions. Both the BCR TKA and normal groups experienced similar kinematic patterns, but the femoral geometrical differences from the anatomical condition may have influenced decreased motion compared to the normal knee. Both TKAs experienced similar kinematic patterns in deeper flexion, with the PCR TKA experiencing excellent weight-bearing flexion. Results from this study suggest that the cruciate ligaments can play a role in kinematics, but femoral geometry working with the ligaments may be an option to consider

Bi-cruciate-retaining (BCR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA), which retains both the anterior (ACL) and posterior cruciate (PCL) ligaments, serves as an alternative to the traditional TKA procedure. Despite the difficulty of ensuring the structural integrity of the prosthesis, the BCR TKA can yield improved patient outcomes such as range of motion, kinematics, and even the survivorship of the implant. When possible, BCR TKA can and should be considered as a viable option to treat end-stage arthritis of the knee. Reconsidering the frequency of the BCR TKA is necessary for several reasons. Patient outcomes following BCR TKA are similar to outcomes for mobile-bearing UKA. Patients with an intact ACL do better with preservation (UKA or BCR TKA) of the ACL. The corollary is also true that removing an intact ACL at the time of arthroplasty has worse outcomes than traditional TKA in patients with an absent ACL. Reported outcomes of BCR TKA include more normal knee function, excellent prosthetic survivorship, and greater patient satisfaction. The BCR TKA may provide a missing link in the continuum of constraint for primary knee arthroplasty. Many early BCR designs fell out of favor because of high rates of prosthetic loosening, and because the procedure was more technically demanding than that of highly successful ACL-sacrificing TKA devices. Recently there has been a reemergence of the BCR arthroplasty concept with improvements in design. By retaining both the ACL and PCL, BCR TKA patients show more normal knee function and flexibility due to anterior stability and replication of the physiological tension in the ACL. Modern BCR TKA models have improved upon early designs but are limited in use mainly due to the lack of an optimal prosthesis design and the relative difficulty of the surgical procedure. Bi-cruciate-retaining TKA is a viable procedure if an appropriate femorotibial gap can be created to mimic physiological tension of the ACL and PCL. In terms of the surgical technique, the procedure begins with femoral preparation to facilitate tibial preparation. Distal femoral resection is performed first taking care to avoid damage to the ACL. Femoral preparation is then completed with a four-in-one guide that incorporates a protector to ensure the ACL is not resected. Good exposure is essential to tibial preparation, which is the critical part of the procedure and involves several steps of setting the depth of resection, and making accurate cuts to protect the tibial eminence island of bone and set tibial component rotation. The medial and lateral tibial cuts must be absolutely parallel. Precise cement technique is required for the tibial baseplate, and care must be taken when trialing the dual bearings. Normal kinematics are preserved when both the ACL and PCL remain intact. Bi-cruciate-retaining TKA knees have been shown to restore more normal kinematics and have better “feel” than traditional ACL-sacrificing TKA knees. Bilateral TKA patients with designs of both types prefer their BCR TKA to their ACL-sacrificing TKA more often than not. An intact ACL has been shown to be present in 60–80% of arthritic knees, further justifying the consideration to retain both cruciate ligaments during TKA. New materials and refined instrumentation and techniques have helped improve the viability of BCR TKA, which may represent an additional option in the continuum of constraint for knee arthroplasty

Introduction. Preservation of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), along with the posterior cruciate ligament, is believed to improve functional outcomes in total knee replacement (TKR). The purpose of this study was to examine gait differences and muscle activation levels between ACL sacrificing (ACL-S) and bicruciate retaining (BCR) TKR subjects during level walking, downhill walking, and stair climbing. Methods. Ten ACL-S (Vanguard CR) (69±8 yrs, 28.7±4.7 kg/m2) and eleven BCR (Vanguard XP, Zimmer-Biomet) (63±11 yrs, 31.0±7.6 kg/m2) subjects participated in this IRB approved study. Except for the condition of the ACL, both TKR designs were similar. Subjects were tested 8–14 months post-op in a motion analysis lab using a point cluster marker set and surface electrodes applied to the Vastus Medialis Oblique (VMO), Rectus Femoris (RF), Biceps Femoris (BF) and Semitendinosus (ST). 3D motion and force data and electromyography (EMG) data were collected simultaneously. Subjects were instructed to walk at a comfortable walking speed across a walkway, down a 12.5% downhill slope, and up a staircase. Five trials per activity were collected. Knee kinematics and kinetics were analyzed using BioMove (Stanford, Stanford, CA). The EMG dataset underwent full-wave rectification and was smoothed using a 300ms RMS window. Gait cycle was time normalized to 100%; relative voluntary contraction (RVC) was calculated by dividing the average activation during downhill walking by the maximum EMG value during level walking and multiplying by 100%. Results. There were no significant kinematic or kinetic differences between implant groups for level walking (p≥0.19). Both groups walked at 1.1 m/s on average during level and approximately 0.1 m/s slower during downhill walking, with no differences in speed (p= 0.91 and 0.77, respectively). For both ACL-S and BCR groups, gait changes from level to downhill walking were similar. For downhill walking, ACL-S subjects were significantly more variable (p<0.001) over the gait cycle for all measured kinematics and kinetics. During both downhill walking and stair climbing, the ACL-S group showed an external peak abduction moment (Fig. 1) significantly greater than that of the BCR group (p=0.05, 0.01). Also during stair climbing, ACL-S subjects showed trending higher peak knee adduction moments (p=0.14) and a more pronounced internal/external rotation pattern (Fig. 2) than BCR subjects. Since no peak kinematic/kinetic differences between groups during level walking exist, the mean maximum muscle activation from level walking was used for RVC normalization for other activities. On average, BCR subjects had lower maximum RVCs during downhill walking than the ACL-S subjects. Effect sizes were large for RF (d=0.94), ST (d=0.88), and VMO (d=1.21), the latter being borderline significant (p=0.05). Discussion. Previous studies on the natural knee have established that the ACL contains mechanoreceptors that improve stability of the knee joint. In this study, BCR subjects show less variable gait measures than subjects with traditional posterior cruciate retaining (ACL-S) TKR, possibly indicating more controlled contact kinematics. In addition, EMG results suggest lower muscle co-contraction during downhill walking, also implying greater knee stability in the BCR group. These results are preliminary and more subjects are needed for definite conclusions

Introduction. Many fluoroscopic studies on total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have identified kinematic variabilities compared to the normal knee, with many subjects experiencing paradoxical motion patterns. The intent of this study was to investigate the results of a newly designed PCR TKA to determine kinematic variabilities and assess these kinematic patterns with those previously documented for the normal knee. Methods. The study involves determining the in vivo kinematics for 80 subjects compared to the normal knee. 10 subjects have a normal knee, 40 have a Journey II PCR TKA and 40 subjects with the Journey II XR TKA (BCR). Although all PCR subjects have been evaluated, we are continuing to evaluate subjects with a BCR TKA. All TKAs were performed by a single surgeon and deemed clinically successful. All subjects performed a deep knee bend from full extension to maximum flexion while under fluoroscopic surveillance. Kinematics were calculated via 3D-to-2D registration at 30° increments from full extension to maximum flexion. Anterior/posterior translation of the medial (MAP) and lateral (LAP) femoral condyles and femorotibial axial rotation were compared during ranges of motion in relation to the function of the cruciate ligaments. Results. Of the 40 PCR TKAs, the average overall flexion was 112.6°, while the average for normal subjects was 139.0°. Initial BCR subjects revealed a higher than expected 128.0°. From 0=30° knee flexion, PCR subjects demonstrated −4.74±4.94 mm of posterior LAP movement, −2.04±4.07 mm of MAP movement and 3.61±8.13° of external axial rotation. In the same range of motion, normal subjects exhibited −8.80±3.32 mm of LAP movement, −3.81±1.03 mm of MAP movement and an axial rotation of 11.34±3.78°. From 30=90° knee flexion, PCR subjects demonstrated 4.37±8.26 mm of LAP movement, 0.12±7.95 mm of MAP movement and 0.79±11.43° of axial rotation. In the same range of motion, normal subjects exhibited −4.28±3.13 mm of LAP movement, −1.11±2.76 mm of MAP movement and axial rotation of 6.54±4.33°. From 0°-maximum flexion, PCR subjects demonstrated −2.71±5.37 mm of LAP movement, 1.79±4.88 mm of MAP movement and 5.99±5.26° of axial rotation. In the same range of motion, normal subjects exhibited −17.83±6.04 mm of LAP movement, −9.11±4.93 mm of MAP movement and axial rotation of 23.66±7.81°. Overall, the BCR subject displayed kinematic patterns similar to those of a normal knee; more detailed numbers will be presented in the presentation. Discussion. Subjects having a PCR TKA experienced excellent weight-bearing flexion and kinematic patterns similar to the normal knee, but less in magnitude. These subjects experienced posterior femoral rollback in early and late flexion. During mid-flexion, subjects having a PCR TKA did experience some variable motion patterns, which may be due to the absence of the ACL. Subjects having a BCR TKA experienced more continuous rollback throughout flexion, more similar to the normal knee. Similar to the normal knee, subjects having a PCR TKA did experience progressive axial rotation throughout knee flexion (Figures). Significance. While they still experience normal-like rollback during early (0°–30°) and late flexion (90°-120°), subjects with a PCR TKA consistently demonstrated Anteriorization of the joint in mid-flexion

INTRODUCTION. In native knees anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and asymmetric shape of the tibial articular surface with a convex lateral plateau are responsible for differential medial and lateral femoral rollback. Contemporary ACL retaining total knee arthroplasty (TKA) improves knee function over ACL sacrificing (CR) TKA; however, these implants do not restore the asymmetric tibial articular geometry. This may explain why ACL retention addresses paradoxical anterior sliding seen in CR TKA, but does not fully restore medial pivot motion. To address this, an ACL retaining biomimetic implant, was designed by moving the femoral component through healthy in vivo kinematics obtained from bi-planar fluoroscopy and sequentially removing material from a tibial template. We hypothesized that the biomimetic articular surface together with ACL preservation would better restore activity dependent kinematics of normal knees, than ACL retention alone. METHODS. Kinematic performance of the biomimetic BCR design (asymmetric tibia with convex lateral surface), a contemporary BCR implant (symmetric shallow dished tibia) and a contemporary CR implant (symmetric dished tibia) was analyzed using KneeSIM software. Chair-sit, deep knee bend, and walking were analyzed. Components were mounted on an average bone model created from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data of 40 normal knees. Soft-tissue insertions were defined on the average knee model based on MRI data, and mechanical properties were obtained from literature. Femoral condyle center motions relative to the tibia were tracked to compare different implant designs. RESULTS. During simulated chair-sit, the biomimetic BCR implant showed knee motion similar to that reported for healthy knees in vivo including medial pivot rotation with greater rollback of the lateral femoral condyle (5 mm medial vs. 11 mm lateral). The CR implant showed posterior femoral subluxation in extension, paradoxical anterior sliding until 60° flexion followed by limited rollback until 105° with no medial pivot rotation. The conventional BCR implant reduced initial posterior shift of the femur in extension, however, medial pivot rotation and steady posterior rollback was not achieved. Similar trends were also found for deep knee bend activity. During walking the CR implant showed posterior subluxation in extension followed by anterior motion similar to the chair-sit activity. Both BCR implants showed less femoral excursion without posterior subluxation similar to published in vivo kinematics data for bi-uni patients. CONCLUSION. By simulating a variety of daily activities with different ranges of knee motion we were able to show that the ACL preserving biomimetic TKA implant could restore activity dependent normal knee kinematics unlike contemporary ACL retaining and ACL sacrificing implants. For chair-sit activity there was a clear medial pivot pattern for the biomimetic BCR design (unlike any other implant), while for lower flexion activities there was no medial pivot apparent in our simulations. These activity dependent knee motions are consistent with published in vivo kinematics and confirmed our hypothesis that biomimetic articular surface together with ACL preservation may be required to restore normal knee function. The biomimetic BCR design with its anatomical articular surface together with ACL preservation may provide patients with a more normal feeling knee following TKA surgery

Purpose. Total knee replacement is the one of the most performed surgeries. However, patient's satisfaction rate is around 70–90 % only. The sacrifice of cruciate ligament might be the main reason, especially in young and active patients. ACL stabilizes the knee by countering the anterior displacing and pivoting force, absorbs the shock and provides proprioception of the knee. However, CR knees has been plagued by injury of PCL during the surgery and preservation of the ACL is a demanding technique. Stiffness is more common comparing to PS designed knee. To insert a tibial baseplate with PE is usually thicker than 8 mm comparing to 2–4 mm of removed tibial bone. The stuffing of joint space may put undue tension on preserved ACL and PCL. Modern designed BCR has been pushed onto market with more sophisticated design and instrumentation. However, early results showed high early loosening rate. Failure to bring the tibia forward during cementing may be the main cause. The bone island where ACL footprint locates is frequently weak, intraoperative fracture happens frequently. A new design was developed by controlled elevation and reattachment of the ACL footprint to meet all the challenges. Method. A new tibial baseplate with a keel was designed. The central part of the baseplate accommodates elevated bony island with ACL footprint. The fenestrations at the central part is designed for reattachment of bony island under proper tension with heavy sutures and fixed at anterior edge of the baseplate in suture bridge fashion and also for autograft to promote bony healing after reattachment. The suture bridge method has been used by arthroscopists for ACL avulsion fracture without the need of immobilization. The elevation of bony island release the tension in the ACL which come from stuffing of baseplate and PE insert and greatly facilitate cementing of the baseplate. The keel improve the weakness of traditional U shape design of BCR knees. Instead of keeping the bony island intact by separately cutting the medial and lateral tibial plateau in BCR knees in the past, we choose to saw the tibial plateau in one stroke as in PS knees, then removes the two condyles. The bony island includes the footprint both ACL and PCL. The central part of tibial baseplate will push the bony island upward which release the undue tension in the cruciate ligaments. Summary. We proposed a new solution for the kinematic conflict in the present bi-cruciate knee designs by elevation and re- attachment of bony island with ACL footprint at the same time simplify the ACL preservation. The simple tibial cutting procedure also facilitate the process. The technique protects PCL from injury during tibial bone cutting in CR knees. We believe the new BCR design has the potential to replace CR knee in term of function and longevity in the future

Background. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is an effective surgical procedure to alleviate excruciating pain and correct dysfunction due to severe knee deformity. The satisfaction rate with current TKA is 80%, While 20% of the patients report uncomfortable feeling during stair descending and deeply knee bending. Preserving the ligaments might allow a restoration close to the natural function, although sacrifice of the ACL is common with the conventional TKA technique. The current bicruciate-retaining (BCR) TKA would be a way to go concerning this issue. This study aimed at evaluating the intraoperative kinematics and joint laxity on BCR TKA if the native function would be replicated and thus assessing the range of motion (ROM) at final followup. Methods. BCR TKAs were performed in 22 knees (12 women, 10 men, average aged 67.2-year-old) with image-free navigation system (Kolibli. TM. ) under general anesthesia. The intraoperative kinematics was evaluated about flexion extension gap (FEG), anterior-posterior translation (APT, bi-condylar rollback) and axial rotation (AR, medial pivot) with passive motion. These kinematic patterns were assessed with the post-operative ROM. Results. There was no paradoxical anterior translation in any cases. The implant kinematics was regulated to the medial pivot motion at early flexion phase and the bi-condylar rollback motion to full flexion angle. The mean flexion was changed from 132 degrees at preoperation to 126 degrees at followup, and the mean flexion contracture improved from 4 degrees to 1 degree. Conclusion. BCR TKA were preserved the nature kinematics including the medial pivot motion and rollback mechanism. Postoperative ROM was quite similar when the preoperative knee flexion was not restricted

INTRODUCTION. ACL retaining (BCR) Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) provides more normal kinematics than ACL sacrificing (CR) TKA. However, in the native knee the ACL and the asymmetric shape of the tibial articular surface with a convex lateral plateau are responsible for the differential medial/lateral femoral rollback (medial pivot). Therefore, the hypothesis of this study was that an asymmetric biomimetic articular surface together with ACL preservation would better restore native knee kinematics than retention of the ACL alone. Normal knee kinematics from bi-planar fluoroscopy was used to reverse engineer the tibial articular surface of the biomimetic implant. This was achieved by moving the femoral component through the healthy knee kinematics and removing material from a tibial template. METHODS. LifeModeler KneeSIM software was used to analyze a biomimetic BCR implant (asymmetric tibia with convex lateral surface), a contemporary BCR (symmetric shallow dished tibia) and a contemporary CR (symmetric dished tibia) implant during simulated deep knee bend and chair sit. Components were mounted on an average bone model created from Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) data of 40 normal knees. The soft-tissue insertions were obtained from the average knee model and the mechanical properties were obtained from literature. Femoral condyle center motions relative to the tibia were used to compare different implant designs. In vivo knee kinematics of healthy subjects from published literature was used for reference. RESULTS. During simulated deep knee bend, the ACL sacrificing contemporary CR implant showed initial posterior femoral subluxation due to the absent ACL, followed by paradoxical anterior sliding until 90° flexion, and no medial pivot rotation. Retention of the ACL in the contemporary BCR implant reduced the initial posterior shift of the femur in extension. However, medial pivot rotation and steady posterior rollback could not be achieved. In contrast, the biomimetic BCR implant showed knee motion very similar to that reported for healthy knees in vivo, with medial pivot rotation and greater, consistent rollback of the lateral femoral condyle than the medial condyle (11 mm medial vs. 16 mm lateral, Fig. 1 and Fig. 3). Similar trends were seen for all implants during simulated chair sit (Fig. 2 and Fig. 3). CONCLUSION. An ACL preserving biomimetic TKA implant was able to restore normal knee kinematics unlike contemporary ACL retaining and ACL sacrificing implants, during the simulated activities. This confirmed the hypothesis that a biomimetic articular surface together with ACL preservation is required to restore normal knee kinematics

The bi-cruciate retaining (BCR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is based on sound biomechanics to produce kinematics close to normal, which is the goal of BCR TKA. This assumes that the joint line is maintained and both cruciates are functional with a range of motion greater than 125 degrees. The technical difficulties of implanting such a knee in correct anatomical position with preservation of both cruciate ligaments with proper tension is challenging and may not be possible in the hands of most surgeons. Patient selection for consideration of BCR TKA assumes that both ligaments are normal and ROM is greater than 125 degrees. If this assumption is correct, why does one need a knee replacement in such a patient? If we assume that the patient has normal cruciate ligaments, there is no scientific evidence to suggest that they will remain normal in the environment of a TKA with longer follow-up. Lastly, fixation with cement may be compromised because of the lack of a stem and less surface area. This can be argued both ways, but the long-term data on this matter favors stemmed designs. Moreover, insertion of cruciate ligaments (ACL) limits the robustness of the connecting bar for bicruciate knees. Lastly over 30 years, surgeons have tried BCR TKA without significant market share. Remember “all good things in life should ultimately prevail”

Aim. In cases of prosthetic joint infections the sensitivity of bacterial cultivation of tissue samples is not 100%. In fact, the reported sensitivity based on standardized criteria and rigorous tissue sampling technique probably differs between 86 to 89%. It has been claimed that sonication of explanted prostheses with subsequent culturing of sonication fluid can increase the sensitivity of the test compared to culturing of tissue samples. To what degree bacteria embedded in biofilm is dislodged during the sonication process has to our knowledge not been fully elucidated. We studied the effect of sonication as a method to dislodge biofilm embedded Staphylococcus epidermidis in vitro. Method. 46 steel plates were colonized with biofilm forming S. epidermidis ATCC 35984 in TSB with 1% glucose aerobically at 37°C for 24 hours. Plates were cleansed for non-adherent bacteria before microscopy. Biofilm embedded bacteria were stained with LIVE/DEAD ™ BacLight ™ Bacterial Viability Kit for microscopy and visualized under vital conditions using EVOS™ FL Auto 2 Imaging System (epifluorescence) and an inverse confocal laser scanning microscope LSM510 (CLSM). All steel plates were subjected to epifluorescence microscopy before and after sonication. CLSM and SEM were used to confirm the presence of biofilm embedded bacteria after sonication. Pictures from epifluorescence microscopy were processed for image analysis with help of a macro application (Fiji) and the data was expressed as biofilm coverage rate (BCR). The sonication was performed using a BactoSonic® Bandolin sonicator and the applied effect in each glass test tube (40 kHz, 800W) was measured with a Bruel og Kjær 8103 hydrophone. The amount of bacteria in the sonication fluid was quantified by counting the number of colony forming units (CFU). Three steel plates acted as negative controls. Results. The BCR was highly variable on the plates after sonication. The biofilm was eradicated from the majority of the plates but a considerable number of plates still had biofilm attached to the surface in a highly variable manner. The amount of bacteria in the sonication fluid correlated poorly with BCR on corresponding plates. Conclusions. Our conclusion is that the ability of sonication to dislodge biofilm embedded S. epidermidis in vitro is not as effective as current opinion might suggest. After sonication biofilm still adhere to a significant number of plates in a highly varying manner. This prompts the need to investigate the effect of sonication on biofilm embedded bacteria formed in vivo

Multiple contemporary TKA designs that sacrifice the anterior cruciate ligament and then either retain or substitute for the posterior cruciate ligament have demonstrated-records of good durability and good function across joint registries worldwide. In recent years there has been an emphasis on improving function in TKA and to that end various strategies including changes in surgical alignment targets (kinematic alignment), the addition of advanced technologies such as computer navigation and sensors in trial components, the expansion of indications for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and the re-introduction of total knee implants that preserve both the ACL and PCL have been championed. Early ACL/PCL retaining total knee implants had mixed results with some designs failing while others championed by Cloutier and by Pritchett have had some success in regard to reasonable durability. Unfortunately those early designs, despite decent durability, did not conclusively demonstrate better function. More recently a new bi-cruciate retaining TKA was introduced with some substantial fanfare. Unfortunately, the widely touted theoretical or potential benefits of bi-cruciate preservation (in regard to better function) have failed to materialise or have been offset by a higher than expected re-operation rate. Even some of the initial proponents of the bi-cruciate implants have noted that the short-term findings are not very encouraging. The largest report to date shows 5% vs. 1.6% all-cause revision at 1 year (BCR vs. CR, respectively) and no improvement in standardised patient reported outcome measures. Some have placed their hopes for BCR TKA on the introduction of robotic technologies or advanced sensor devices but whether those prove to be meaningful enabling technologies remains to be determined. In 2017 it appears that while bi-cruciate retaining TKA is intellectually intriguing it does require the practicing surgeon to cross “a bridge too far.”