Information on knee kinematics during surgery is currently lacking. The aim of this study is to describe intra-operative kinematics evaluations during uni-compartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) by mean of a navigation system. Anatomical and kinematic data were acquired by Kin-Nav navigation system and analysed by a dedicated elaboration software developed at our laboratory. The study was conducted on 20 patients: 10 patients undergoing mini-invasive UKA and 10 patients undergoing posterior-substituting-rotating-platform TKA. In both group of patients the surgeon performed passive knee flexion immediately before and immediately after the prosthetic implant. Pattern and amount of internal/external tibial rotation in function of flexion were computed and significant changes between before and after implant were evaluated adopting Student’s t-test (significant level p=0.05).

UKA implant did not significantly change the pattern of internal/external tibial rotation, nor the total magnitude of tibial rotation (15.75°±7.27°) during range of flexion (10°–110°), compared to pre-operative values (17.87°±7.34°, p=0.25). Magnitude of tibial rotation in TKA group before surgery (8.00°±3.67°) was significantly less compared to UKA patients and did not changed significantly after implant (5.96°±4.88°, p=0.09). Pattern of rotation before and after TKA implant were different between each other and between pattern in UKA patients both before and after implant.

Intra-operative evaluations on tibial rotation during knee flexion confirmed some assumptions on knee implants from post-operative methods and suggest a more extensive use of surgical navigation systems for kinematic studies.

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is actually a satisfactory technique to reduce pain and enhance mobility in osteoartritic pathologies (OA) of the knee. However, life of the implant is strictly dependent on restoration of correct knee kinematics, as alteration of motion pattern could led to abnormal wear in prosthetic components and also damage soft tissues. The aim of our study was to evaluate new kinematic tests to be performed during surgery in order to improve the standard intra-operative evaluation of the outcome on the individual case. We used Kin-Nav navigation system to acquire anatomic and kinematic data, which were analysed by a dedicated elaboration software developed at our laboratory. Ten patients undergoing rotating platform cruciate substituting TKA were considered for this study. Immediately before the implant and immediately after component positioning, the surgeon performed 3 complete knee flexion imposing internal tibial rotation (IPROM) and 3 complete knee flexion imposing external tibial rotation (EPROM). Tibial rotation during IPROM and EPROM tests was plotted in function of flexion (in the range 10°–110°). Repeatability of IPROM and EPROM was tested by calculating ICC (Intra-class Correlation Coefficient) between 3 repeated curves. Distance between IPROM curve and EPROM curve was computed at various degree of flexion. Maximum distance obtained during all range of flexion before and after the implant were compared by Student’s t-test (significant level p=0.05).

ICC for repeated motions were 0.99 for IPROM and 0.98 for EPROM. Maximum distance between tibial rotation in IPROM and EPROM was 27.82±6.98 before implant and significantly increased (p=0.001) to 40.09±6.92 after TKA. In one case we observed that the value remained similar before and after implant (from 33.11 to 33.98) while in one case we observed very large increase of rotation (from 30.56 to 50.01).

The proposed kinematic tests were able to quantify the increase of tibial rotation after TKA implant. Future development of the study are encouraging and will include a larger sample and reflections on individual findings.

Aims: This work describes a new intraoperative computer-assisted method for the evaluation of joint kinematics in both total (TKA) and uni-compartmental (UKA) knee arthroplasty. We report schematically the protocol and the preliminary in-vivo results we obtained on 11 patients (9 UKA – 2 TKA).

Methods: The system consists of an optoelectronic localizer, 2 reference arrays and a dedicated acquisition software, that permits the real-time control of limb position and allows the acquisition of joint motions. After a first phase of registration (anatomical landmarks identification) the surgeon executes, both before and after the reconstruction, a series of passive tests: range of motion (PROM) evaluation, varus-valgus (VV) stress at 0°, and VV at 30°. Furthermore the surgeon can acquire also anatomical surfaces (tibial plateaus, femoral condyles, prosthetic components, etc.). The 3D kinematic evaluations and anatomical data are recorded before and after the joint reconstruction. This new methodology has been used during 11 interventions fulfilled at our institute. We compare the PROM results with literature, and we also analyzed the interoperator repeatability in the execution of the tests (3 repetitions performed by a senior surgeon).

Results: The kinematic analysis of the PROM showed that there were no significant differences between per-operative and post-operative in all UKA cases. In the 2 TKR cases internal-external (IE) rotations appeared reduced after the implant, but further data are necessary to have a statistical evidence. The extension was improved both in UKA and TKA. The VV laxity at 0 ° was significantly reduced (p < 0.001), while at 30 ° stayed constant (p = 0.010). In all the TKR cases the evaluation of contact areas between femoral and tibial components showed normal pattern, and in UKA the contacts remain inside the prosthesis areas. Measured kinematic parameters (knee rotations, screw-home mechanism and alignment) were comparable with literature and manual estimation at surgical time.

Conclusions: The proposed protocol optimizes surgical times and minimizes invasiveness. The preliminary results showed that the system is able to quantify new kinematic parameters during intraoperative evaluations, provides data about alignments, gaps, stability and 3D motions of the individual knee and therefore can allow an accurate and real-time estimation of the passive knee function. Moreover the new 3D anatomical and kinematic data can improve the biomechanical understanding of the pathological and prosthetic knees.

The kinematic effect of tunnel orientation and position, during ACL reconstruction, has been only recently related to the control of rotational instability.

This paper presents a detailed computer-assisted in vitro evaluation of two different femoral tunnel orientations with the same tunnel position, at 10.30 ‘o clock, during the intervention of ACL reconstruction with double bundle technique. Results highlighted better kinematic performances of the horizontal tunnel, with respect to the vertical one, in controlling antero-posterior (AP) laxities at 30°, and internal-external (IE) laxities.

Elongations of anterior and posterior bundles of reconstructed ACL, for both reconstruction, decreased during PROM respectively by 20% and 40%. Total length of the graft varied during PROM, mainly due to graft elongation during tests, graft length on horizontal tunnel varied from 237 to 213mm while graft length on vertical tunnel varied from 257 to 233mm. Kinematic tests showed a better performance of horizontal tunnel in the control of IE rotations at 30° and 90° and of the Lachman test with respect to the vertical one. Stability was restored with both reconstructions.

This study identifies parameters that allow to foresee the necessity of soft tissue release (STR) before surgery. Femoral and tibial morphotype were defined evaluating several radiological parameters. Intra-operative STR during surgery was correlated to radiographic parameters identified. 33 cases were analysed and divided in 2 groups, release (6) no release (27), statistical evaluation has been performed using Mann-Whitney test and contingency tables for most relevant parameters. Three parameters were measured on femur and four on tibia.

The results confirmed the usability of angle between femoral anatomical axis and transepicondylar axis ATA (p< 0.001) and between femoral mechanical axis and tangent to distal condyles MCA (p< 0.001 ) as predictors, among tibial parameters angle between mechanical axis and tangent to tibial plateaux gives good results (p=0.028).The use of contingency tables highlighted that the combined use of ATA and MCA, gives better specificity than the use of a single angle.

We report a study of the shapes of the tibial and femoral articular surfaces in sagittal, frontal and coronal planes which was performed on cadaver knees using two techniques, MRI and computer interpolation of sections of the articular surfaces acquired by a three-dimensional digitiser.

The findings using MRI, confirmed in a previous study by dissection, were the same as those using the digitiser. Thus both methods appear to be valid anatomical tools.

The tibial and femoral articular surfaces can be divided into anterior segments, contacting from 0° to 20 ± 10° of flexion, and posterior segments, contacting from 20 ± 10° to 120° of flexion. The medial and lateral compartments are asymmetrical, particularly anteriorly. Posteromedially, the femur is spherical and is located in a conforming, but partly deficient, tibial socket. Posterolaterally, it is circular only in the sagittal section and the tibia is flat centrally, sloping downwards both anteriorly and posteriorly to receive the meniscal horns. Anteromedially, the femur is convex with a sagittal radius larger than that posteriorly, while the tibia is flat sloping upwards and forwards. Anterolaterally, both the femoral and tibial surfaces are largely deficient.

These shapes suggest that medially the femur can rotate on the tibia through three axes intersecting in the middle of the femoral sphere, but that the sphere can only translate anteroposteriorly and even then to a limited extent. Laterally, the femur can freely translate anteroposteriorly, but can only rotate around a transverse axis for that part of the arc, i.e., near extension, during which it comes into contact with the tibia through its flattened distal/medial surface as against its spherical posterior surface.