Important factors affecting quality of life (QOL) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) include postoperative knee kinematics and geometry, influenced by implant design and placement (Matsuda 2001; Nishikawa 2013; Noble 2005). Although specific design factors and their effect on kinematics or QOL have been investigated previously, the inter-relationships between preop-postop changes in kinematics, geometry and the resulting QOL have not been studied to our knowledge. These are essential to understand the interplay between the different factors, and to determine which factors manufacturers and surgeons should focus on when designing and implanting knee prostheses. In addition, the majority of TKA studies focus on the tibiofemoral (TF) joint, although the patellofemoral (PF) joint is routinely the source of postop complications; the PF joint is difficult to study due to polyethylene radio-transparency and because the femoral component obscures the patella from most directions.

The purpose of this pilot study was to correlate changes in knee articular shape, over which the implant designers and surgeons have some control, to changes in kinematics and postop QOL, with a particular focus on the PF joint, to answer the following research questions for a sample population with a given implant design and surgeon: (1) Do changes in knee shape affect knee kinematics? In particular, is patellar tracking affected by groove location? (2) Do changes in knee kinematics affect QOL? (3) Do changes in knee shape (resulting from implant design and placement) affect QOL? (4) Do individuals with worse QOL differ from those with better QOL?

Knee kinematics are altered by total knee arthroplasty (TKA) both intentionally and unintentionally. Knowledge of how and why kinematics change may improve patient outcome and satisfaction through improved implant design, implant placement or through rehabilitation.

In the present study we imaged and compared the 6 degree-of-freedom (DOF) patellofemoral (PF) and tibiofemoral (TF) kinematics of 9 pre-TKA subjects to the kinematics of 15 post-TKA subjects (Zimmer NexGen LPS implants) using a novel sequential-biplanar radiographic protocol that allowed imaging the postoperative patellofemoral joint under weightbearing throughout the range of motion, which has not been done previously to our knowledge.

There were clear, statistically significant differences between the pre-TKA and post-TKA kinematics: for the TF joint, the tibia was more posterior and inferior (max 20 mm and 15 mm, respectively) in the post-TKA group compared to the pre-TKA group (p<0.001), and had neutral alignment in the post-TKA group compared to varus alignment (max 9°) in the pre-TKA group (p<0.001). For the PF joint, the patella was shifted more posteriorly and medially, and tilted more medially in the post-TKA group compared to the pre-TKA group (p<0.001). There were no significant differences in PF superior/inferior translation and flexion/extension (p>0.5). Both groups showed differences from normal kinematics, based on the literature.

The kinematic differences are likely due to a combination of surgical, implant and patient factors. To investigate this further, we imaged the 9 pre-TKA subjects a minimum one year after their surgery; analysis of these data is in progress. Computed tomography (CT) scans and quality of life surveys were also taken before and after surgery. By comparing the preoperative and postoperative kinematics and shape for the same subjects, and analysing the interrelationships amongst these, we aim to determine if a different implant shape or different component positioning could create more normal kinematics, resulting in a better clinical outcome.