One of the most controversial issues in total knee replacement is whether or not to resurface the patella. In order to determine the effects of different designs of femoral component on the conformity of the patellofemoral joint, five different knee prostheses were investigated. These were Low Contact Stress, the Miller-Galante II, the NexGen, the Porous-Coated Anatomic, and the Total Condylar prostheses. Three-dimensional models of the prostheses and a native patella were developed and assessed by computer. The conformity of the curvature of the five different prosthetic femoral components to their corresponding patellar implants and to the native patella at different angles of flexion was assessed by measuring the angles of intersection of tangential lines.

The Total Condylar prosthesis had the lowest conformity with the native patella (mean 8.58°; 0.14° to 29.9°) and with its own patellar component (mean 11.36°; 0.55° to 39.19°). In the other four prostheses, the conformity was better (mean 2.25°; 0.02° to 10.52°) when articulated with the corresponding patellar component. The Porous-Coated Anatomic femoral component showed better conformity (mean 6.51°; 0.07° to 9.89°) than the Miller-Galante II prosthesis (mean 11.20°; 5.80° to 16.72°) when tested with the native patella. Although the Nexgen prosthesis had less conformity with the native patella at a low angle of flexion, this improved at mid (mean 3.57°; 1.40° to 4.56°) or high angles of flexion (mean 4.54°; 0.91° to 9.39°), respectively. The Low Contact Stress femoral component had the best conformity with the native patella (mean 2.39°; 0.04° to 4.56°). There was no significant difference (p > 0.208) between the conformity when tested with the native patella or its own patellar component at any angle of flexion.

The geometry of the anterior flange of a femoral component affects the conformity of the patellofemoral joint when articulating with the native patella. A more anatomical design of femoral component is preferable if the surgeon decides not to resurface the patella at the time of operation.

A total of 20 pairs of fresh-frozen cadaver femurs were assigned to four alignment groups consisting of relative varus (10° and 20°) and relative valgus (10° and 20°), 75 composite femurs of two neck geometries were also used. In both the cadaver and the composite femurs, placing the component in 20° of valgus resulted in a significant increase in load to failure. Placing the component in 10° of valgus had no appreciable effect on increasing the load to failure except in the composite femurs with varus native femoral necks. Specimens in 10° of varus were significantly weaker than the neutrally-aligned specimens.

The results suggest that retention of the intact proximal femoral strength occurs at an implant angulation of ≥ 142°. However, the benefit of extreme valgus alignment may be outweighed in clinical practice by the risk of superior femoral neck notching, which was avoided in this study.