MCL injuries often occur concurrently with ACL rupture – most noncontact ACL injuries occur in valgus and external rotation (ER) - and conservative MCL treatment leads to increased rate of ACL reconstruction failure. There has been little work developing effective MCL reconstructions. Cadaveric work measured MCL attachments by digitisation and radiographically, relating them to anatomical landmarks. The isometry of the superficial and deep MCL (sMCL and dMCL) and posterior oblique ligament (POL) was measured using fine sutures led to displacement transducers. Contributions to stability (restraint) were measured in a robotic testing system. Two MCL reconstructions were designed and tested: 3-strand reconstruction (sMCL+dMCL+POL), and 2-strand method (sMCL+dMCL) addressing anteromedial rotatory instability (AMRI). The resulting stability was measured in a kinematics test rig, and compared to the ‘anatomic’ sMCL+POL reconstruction of LaPrade.Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Little scientific evidence is available regarding the effect of knee joint line obliquity (JLO). 10 fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees were axially loaded to 1500 N in a materials testing machine with the joint line tilted 0, 4, 8, and 12 degrees varus and valgus, at 0, and 20 degrees of knee flexion. The mechanical compression axis was aligned to the centre of the tibial plateau. Contact pressures / areas were recorded by sensors inserted between the tibia and femur below the menisci. Changes in relative femoral and tibial position in the coronal plane were obtained by an optical tracking system.Abstract
Background
Methods
Pre-clinical assessment of total knee replacements (TKR) can provide useful information about the constraint provided by an implant, and therefore help the surgeon decide the most appropriate configurations. For example, increasing the posterior tibial slope is believed to delay impingement in deep flexion and thus increase the maximal flexion angle of the knee, however it is unclear what effect this has on anterior-posterior (AP) constraint. The current ASTM standard (F1223) for determining constraint gives little guidance on important factors such as medial- lateral (M:L) loading distribution, flexion angle or coupled secondary motions. Therefore, the aim of the study was to assess the sensitivity of the ASTM standard to these variations, and investigate how increasing the posterior tibial slope affects TKR constraint. Using a six degree of freedom testing rig, a cruciate-retaining TKR (Legion; Smith & Nephew) was tested for AP translational constraint. In both anterior and posterior directions, the tibial component was displaced until a ‘dislocation limit’ was reached (fig. 1), the point at which the force-displacement graph started to plateau (fig. 2). Compressive joint loads from 710 to 2000 N, and a range of medial-lateral (M:L) load distributions, from 70:30% to 30:70% M:L, were applied at different flexion angles with secondary motions unconstrained. The posterior slope of the tibial component was varied at 0°, 3°, 6° and 9°.Introduction
Methods
In total knee arthroplasty (TKA) the knee may be found to be too stiff in extension, causing a flexion contracture. One proposed surgical technique to correct this extension deficit is to recut the distal femur, but that may lead to excessively raising the joint line. Alternatively, full extension may be gained by stripping the posterior capsule from its femoral attachment, however if this release has an adverse impact on anterior-posterior (AP) stability of the implanted knee then it may be advisable to avoid this technique. The aim of the study was therefore to investigate the effect of posterior capsular release on AP stability in TKA, and compare this to the restraint from the cruciate ligaments and different TKA inserts. Eight cadaveric knees were mounted in a six degree of freedom testing rig (Fig.1) and tested at 0°, 30°, 60° and 90° flexion with ±150 N AP force, with and without a 710 N axial compressive load. The rig allowed an AP drawer to be applied to the tibia at a fixed angle of flexion, whilst the other degrees-of-freedom were unconstrained and free to translate/ rotate. After the native knee was tested with and without the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), a cruciate-retaining TKA (Legion; Smith & Nephew) was implanted and the tests repeated. The following stages were then performed: replacing with a deep dished insert, cutting the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL), releasing the posterior capsule using an osteotome (Fig. 2), replacing with a posterior-stabilised implant and finally using a more-constrained insert.Introduction
Methods
There is little information available to surgeons regarding how the lateral soft-tissue structures prevent instability in knees implanted with total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this study was to quantify the lateral soft-tissue contributions to stability following cruciate retaining (CR) TKA. Nine cadaveric knees with CR TKA implants (PFC Sigma; DePuy Synthes Joint Reconstruction) were tested in a robotic system (Fig. 1) at full extension, 30°, 60°, and 90° flexion angles. ±90 N anterior-posterior force, ±8 Nm varus-valgus and ±5 Nm internal-external torque were applied at each flexion angle. The anterolateral structures (ALS, including the iliotibial band, anterolateral ligament and anterolateral capsule), the lateral collateral ligament (LCL), the popliteus tendon complex (Pop T) and the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) were then sequentially transected. After each transection the kinematics obtained from the original loads were replayed, and the decrease in force / moment equated to the relative contributions of each soft-tissue to stabilising the applied loads.Introduction
Methods
Instability is reported to account for around 20% of early TKR revisions. The concept of restoring the “Envelope of Laxity” (EoL) mandates a balanced knee through a continuous arc of functional movement. We therefore hypothesised that a single radius (SR) design should confer this stability since it has been proposed that the SR promotes normal medial collateral ligament (MCL) function with isometric stability throughout the full arc of motion. Our aim was to characterise the EoL and stability offered by a SR cruciate retaining (CR)-TKR, which maintains a SR from 10–110° flexion. This was compared with that of the native knee throughout the arc of flexion in terms of anterior, varus/valgus and internal/ external laxity to assess whether a SR CR-TKR design can mimic normal knee joint kinematics and stability. Eight fresh frozen cadaveric lower limbs were physiologically loaded on a custom jig. The operating surgeon performed anterior drawer, varus/ valgus and internal/external rotation tests to determine ‘maximum’ displacements in 1) native knee and 2) single radius CR-TKR (Stryker Triathlon) at 0°, 30°, 60°, 90° and 110° flexion. Displacements were recorded using computer navigation. Significance was determined by linear modelling (p≤0.05). The key finding of this work was that the EoL offered by the SR CR-TKR was largely equivalent to that of the native knee from 0–110°. The EoL increased significantly with flexion angle for both native and replaced knees. Overall, after TKR anterior laxity was comparable with the native knee, whilst total varus-valgus and internal-external rotational laxities reduced by only 1°. However, separated varus and valgus laxities at 110° significantly increased after TKR as did anterior laxity at 30° flexion. In conclusion, the overall EoL offered by the SR CR-TKR is comparable to that of the native knee. In the absence of soft tissue deficiency, the implant appears to offer reliable and reproducible stability throughout the functional range of movement, with exception of anterior laxity at 30° and varus and valgus laxity when the knee approaches high flexion. These shortcomings should offer scope for future work.
