Poor soft tissue balance in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most primary causes of dissatisfaction and reduced joint longevity, which are associated with postoperative instability and early implant failure¹. Therefore, surgical techniques, including mechanical instruments and 3-D guided navigation systems, in TKA aim to achieve optimum soft tissue balancing in the knee to improve postoperative outcome². Patella-in-Place balancing (PIPB) is a novel technique which aims to restore native collateral ligament behaviour by preserving the original state without any release. Moreover, reduction of the joint laxity compensates for the loss of the visco-elastic properties of the cartilage and meniscus. Following its clinical success, we aimed to evaluate the impact of the PIPB technique on collateral ligament strain and laxity behaviour, with the hypothesis that PIPB would restore strains in the collateral ligaments³.

Eight fresh-frozen cadaveric legs were obtained (KU Leuven, Belgium, H019 2015-11-04) and CT images were acquired while rigid marker frames were affixed into the femur, and tibia for testing. After carefully removing the soft tissues around the knee joint, while preserving the joint capsule, ligaments, and tendons, digital extensometers (MTS, Minnesota, USA) were attached along the length of the superficial medial collateral ligament (MCL) and lateral collateral ligament (LCL). A handheld digital dynamometer (Mark-10, Copiague, USA) was used to apply an abduction or adduction moment of 10 Nm at fixed knee flexion angles of 0°, 30°, 60° and 90°. A motion capture system (Vicon Motion Systems, UK) was used to record the trajectories of the rigid marker frames while synchronized strain data was collected for MCL/LCL. All motion protocols were applied following TKA was performed using PIPB with a cruciate retaining implant (Stryker Triathlon, MI, USA). Furthermore, tibiofemoral kinematics were calculated⁴ and combined with the strain data. Postoperative tibial varus/valgus stresses and collateral ligament strains were compared to the native condition using the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test (p<0.05).

Postoperative tibial valgus laxity was lower than the native condition for all flexion angles. Moreover, tibial valgus of TKA was significantly different than the native condition, except for 0° (p=0.32). Although, tibial varus laxity of TKA was lower than the native at all angles, significant difference was only found at 0° (p=0.03) and 90° (p=0.02). No significant differences were observed in postoperative collateral ligament strains, as compared to the native condition, for all flexion angles, except for MCL strain at 30° (p=0.02) and 60° (p=0.01).

Results from this experimental study supported our hypotheses, barring MCL strain in mid-flexion, which might be associated with the implant design. Restored collateral ligament strains with reduced joint laxity, demonstrated by the PIPB technique in TKA in vitro, could potentially restore natural joint kinematics, thereby improving patient outcomes.

In conclusion, to further prove the success of PIPB, further biomechanical studies are required to evaluate the success rate of PIPB technique in different implant designs.

Joint laxity assessments have been a valuable resource in order to understand the biomechanics and pathologies of the knee. Clinical laxity tests like the Lachman test, Pivot-shift test and Drawer test are, however, subjective of nature and will often only provide basic information of the joint. Stress radiography is another option for assessing knee laxity; however, this method is also limited in terms of quantifiability and one-dimensionality.

This study proposes a novel non-invasive low-dose radiation method to accurately measure knee joint laxity in 3D. A method that combines a force controlled parallel manipulator device, a medical image and a biplanar x-ray system.

As proof-of-concept, a cadaveric knee was CT scanned and subsequently mounted at 30 degrees of flexion in the device and placed inside a biplanar x-ray scanner. Biplanar x-rays were obtained for eleven static load cases.

The preliminary results from this study display that the device is capable of measuring primary knee laxity kinematics similar to what have been reported in previous studies. Additionally, the results also display that the method is capable of capturing coupled motions like internal/external rotation when anteroposterior loads are applied.

We have displayed that the presented method is capable of obtaining knee joint laxity in 3D. The method is combining concepts from robotic arthrometry and stress radiography into one unified solution that potentially enables unprecedented 3D joint laxity measurements non-invasively. The method potentially eliminates limitations present in previous methods and significantly reduces the radiation exposure of the patient compared to conventional stress radiography.

Mobile-bearing posterior-stabilised knee replacements have been developed as an alternative to the standard fixed- and mobile-bearing designs. However, little is known about the in vivo kinematics of this new group of implants. We investigated 31 patients who had undergone a total knee replacement with a similar prosthetic design but with three different options: fixed-bearing posterior cruciate ligament-retaining, fixed-bearing posterior-stabilised and mobile-bearing posterior-stabilised. To do this we used a three-dimensional to two-dimensional model registration technique. Both the fixed- and mobile-bearing posterior-stabilised configurations used the same femoral component. We found that fixed-bearing posterior stabilised and mobile-bearing posterior-stabilised knee replacements demonstrated similar kinematic patterns, with consistent femoral roll-back during flexion. Mobile-bearing posterior-stabilised knee replacements demonstrated greater and more natural internal rotation of the tibia during flexion than fixed-bearing posterior-stabilised designs. Such rotation occurred at the interface between the insert and tibial tray for mobile-bearing posterior-stabilised designs. However, for fixed-bearing posterior-stabilised designs, rotation occurred at the proximal surface of the bearing. Posterior cruciate ligament-retaining knee replacements demonstrated paradoxical sliding forward of the femur.

We conclude that mobile-bearing posterior-stabilised knee replacements reproduce internal rotation of the tibia more closely during flexion than fixed-bearing posterior-stabilised designs. Furthermore, mobile-bearing posterior-stabilised knee replacements demonstrate a unidirectional movement which occurs at the upper and lower sides of the mobile insert. The femur moves in an anteroposterior direction on the upper surface of the insert, whereas the movement at the lower surface is pure rotation. Such unidirectional movement may lead to less wear when compared with the multidirectional movement seen in fixed-bearing posterior-stabilised knee replacements, and should be associated with more evenly applied cam-post stresses.