Objectives. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a demanding procedure, with tibial component subsidence or pain from high tibial strain being potential causes of revision. The optimal position in terms of load transfer has not been documented for lateral UKA. Our aim was to determine the effect of tibial component position on proximal tibial strain. Methods. A total of 16 composite tibias were implanted with an Oxford Domed Lateral Partial Knee implant using cutting guides to define tibial slope and resection depth. Four implant positions were assessed: standard (5° posterior slope); 10° posterior slope; 5° reverse tibial slope; and 4 mm increased tibial resection. Using an electrodynamic axial-torsional materials testing machine (Instron 5565), a compressive load of 1.5 kN was applied at 60 N/s on a meniscal bearing via a matching femoral component. Tibial strain beneath the implant was measured using a calibrated Digital Image Correlation system. Results. A 5° increase in tibial component posterior slope resulted in a 53% increase in mean major principal strain in the posterior tibial zone adjacent to the implant (p = 0.003). The highest strains for all implant positions were recorded in the anterior cortex 2 cm to 3 cm distal to the implant. Posteriorly, strain tended to decrease with increasing distance from the implant. Lateral cortical strain showed no significant relationship with implant position. Conclusion. Relatively small changes in implant position and orientation may significantly affect tibial cortical strain. Avoidance of excessive posterior tibial slope may be advisable during lateral UKA. Cite this article: A. M. Ali, S. D. S. Newman, P. A. Hooper, C. M. Davies, J. P. Cobb. The effect of implant position on bone strain following lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A Biomechanical Model Using Digital Image Correlation. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:522–529. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.68.BJR-2017-0067.R1

Abstract. Background. The Oxford Domed Lateral (ODL) Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (UKR) has some advantages over other lateral UKRs, but the mobile bearing dislocation rate is high (1–6%). Medial dislocations, with the bearing lodged on the tibial component wall, are most common. Anterior/posterior dislocations are rare. For a dislocation to occur distraction of the joint is required. We have developed and validated a dislocation analysis tool based on a computer model of the ODL with a robotics path-planning algorithm to determine the Vertical Distraction required for a Dislocation (VDD), which is inversely related to the risk of dislocation. Objectives. To modify the ODL design so the risk of medial dislocation decreases to that of an anterior/posterior dislocation. Methods. The components were modified using Solidworks. For each modification the dislocation analysis tool was used to determine the VDD for medial dislocation (with bearing 0–6mm from the tibial wall). This was compared with the original implant to identify the modifications that were most effective at reducing the dislocation risk. These modifications were combined into a final design, which was assessed. Results. Modifying the tibial component plateau, changing the femoral component width and making the bearing wider medially had little effect on VDD. Shifting the femoral sphere centre medially decreased VDD. Shifting the femoral sphere laterally, increasing tibial wall height and increasing bearing width laterally increased VDD. A modified implant with a femoral sphere centre 3mm lateral, wall 2.8mm higher, and bearing 2mm wider laterally, implanted so the bearing is ≤4mm from the tibial wall with a bearing thickness ≥4mm had a minimum VDD for medial dislocation of 5.75mm, which is larger than the minimum VDD for anterior/posterior dislocation of 5.5mm. Conclusions. A modified ODL design should decrease the dislocation rate to an acceptable level, however, further testing in cadavers is required. Declaration of Interest. (a) fully declare any financial or other potential conflict of interest