The optimum cementing technique for the tibial
component in cemented primary total knee replacement (TKR) remains
controversial. The technique of cementing, the volume of cement
and the penetration are largely dependent on the operator, and hence
large variations can occur. Clinical, experimental and computational
studies have been performed, with conflicting results. Early implant
migration is an indication of loosening. Aseptic loosening is the
most common cause of failure in primary TKR and is the product of
several factors. Sufficient penetration of cement has been shown
to increase implant stability. This review discusses the relevant literature regarding all aspects
of the cementing of the tibial component at primary TKR. Cite this article:
Orthopaedic surgery is in an exciting transitional period as modern surgical interventions, implants and scientific developments are providing new therapeutic options. As advances in basic science and technology improve our understanding of the pathology and repair of musculoskeletal tissue, traditional operations may be replaced by newer, less invasive procedures which are more appropriately targeted at the underlying pathophysiology. However, evidence-based practice will remain a basic requirement of care. Orthopaedic surgeons can and should remain at the forefront of the development of novel therapeutic interventions and their application. Progression of the potential of bench research into an improved array of orthopaedic treatments in an effective yet safe manner will require the development of a subgroup of specialists with extended training in research to play an important role in bridging the gap between laboratory science and clinical practice. International regulations regarding the introduction of new biological treatments will place an additional burden on the mechanisms of this translational process, and orthopaedic surgeons who are trained in science, surgery and the regulatory environment will be essential. Training and supporting individuals with these skills requires special consideration and discussion by the orthopaedic community. In this paper we review some traditional approaches to the integration of orthopaedic science and surgery, the therapeutic potential of current regenerative biomedical science for cartilage repair and ways in which we may develop surgeons with the skills required to translate scientific discovery into effective and properly assessed orthopaedic treatments.
Our aims were to map the tibial footprint of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) using MRI in patients undergoing PCL-preserving total knee replacement, and to document the disruption of this footprint as a result of the tibial cut. In 26 consecutive patients plain radiography and MRI of the knee were performed pre-operatively, and plain radiography post-operatively. The lower margin of the PCL footprint was located a mean of 1 mm (−10 to 8) above the upper aspect of the fibular head. The mean surface area was 83 mm2 (49 to 142). One-third of patients (8 of 22) had tibial cuts made below the lowest aspect of the PCL footprint (complete removal) and one-third (9 of 22) had cuts extending into the footprint (partial removal). The remaining patients (5 of 22) had footprints unaffected by the cuts, keeping them intact. Our study highlights the wide variation in the location of the tibial PCL footprint when referenced against the fibula. Proximal tibial cuts using conventional jigs resulted in the removal of a significant portion, if not all of the PCL footprint in most of the patients in our study. Our findings suggest that when performing PCL-retaining total knee replacement the tibial attachment of the PCL is often removed.
