Traditional TKR designs exhibit abnormal and unpredictable kinematics: with posterior subluxation in extension and anterior slide with flexion. These can contribute to restricted knee flexion and reduced quadriceps efficiency. Newer designs attempt to provide “guided motion” with the aim of mimicking normal knee kinematics. The Journey (Smith & Nephew) BCS TKR incorporates both an anterior and a posterior cam/post mechanism while Triathlon PS TKR (Stryker) incorporates a posterior cam/post mechanism. This study compares the in-vivo kinematics of these two designs and compares it with normal knee. Knee kinematics of 10 patients with Journey-BCS TKR and 11 patients with Triathlon PS TKR; all with excellent clinical outcome (average age: 65) were analysed. Patients underwent fluoroscopic assessment of the knee during a step-up and deep knee bend exercise. 2D fluoroscopic images were recorded. Data was analysed for patella tendon angle (PTA) and contact points using a 3D model fitting technique. This data was compared to normal knee kinematics (n=20).Introduction
Methods
