Mid-flexion instability may cause poor outcomes following TKA. Surgical technique, patient-specific factors, and implant design could all contribute to it, with modelling and fluoroscopy data suggesting the latter may be the root cause. However, current implants all pass the preclinical stability testing standards, making it difficult to understand the effects of implant design on instability. We hypothesized that a more physiological test, analysing functional stability across the range of knee flexion-extension, could delineate the effects of design, independent of surgical technique and patient-specific factors. Using a SIMvitro-controlled six-degree-of-freedom robot, a dynamic stability test was developed, including continuous flexion and reporting data in a trans-epicondylar axis system. 3 femoral geometries were tested: gradually reducing radius, multi-radius and single-radius, with their respective tibial inserts. 710N of compression force (body weight) was applied to the implants as they were flexed from 0–140° with three levels of anterior/posterior (AP) tibial force applied (−90N,0N,90N).Abstract
Introduction
Methods
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
