PDF herunterladen
J Knee Surg 2017; 30(02): 107-113
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1581134
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

The Mediolateral Excursion of the Meniscal Bearing during Flexion and Extension of the Knee after Medial Mobile-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Seung-Yup Lee
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul Barunsesang Hospital, Seoul, The Republic of Korea
,
Ji-Hoon Bae
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, The Republic of Korea
,
Dong-Won Suh
3   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Barunsesang Hospital Ringgold Standard Institution, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, The Republic of Korea
,
Han-Ju Kim
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, The Republic of Korea
,
Hong-Chul Lim
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul Barunsesang Hospital, Seoul, The Republic of Korea
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

30. Dezember 2015

21. Februar 2016

Publikationsdatum:
18. April 2016 (online)

    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

This mediolateral excursion of the bearing during knee motion is supposed to be caused by external rotation of the tibia during knee extension. However, to our knowledge, there is no published clinical evidence supporting these hypotheses. The current study aimed to evaluate the mediolateral excursion of the bearing during flexion-extension motion of the knee after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). In 52 knees, varus/valgus (F-VarVal) or rotational position (F-Rot) of the femoral component and relative location of the bearing were measured with the standing anteroposterior and modified axial view, respectively. We adopted the modified axial radiographs that are simple to assess the bearing position in the flexed knee. The modified axial view showed excellent inter- and intraobserver agreements. F-Rot in the modified axial view and CT showed a high agreement in terms of validity (r = 0.98; p < 0.0001). On average, the bearing showed more medial position in extension than flexion of the knee. No correlation was found between the femoral component positions (F-VarVal and F-Rot) and mediolateral bearing excursion (p = 0.68 and 0.80, respectively). In conclusion, coronal location of bearing according to flexion-extension of the knee is not influenced by the coronal and axial alignment of the femoral component. With simple radiographic method, more medial position of the bearing according to flexion-extension of the knee. Our method could be used to assess axial rotation of the femoral component and spin-out phenomenon of the bearing following the medial UKA.

Keywords

femoral component - mobile bearing - component position - unicompartmental knee arthroplasty
 

  • References

  • 1 Price AJ, Svard U. A second decade lifetable survival analysis of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469 (1) 174-179
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Emerson Jr RH, Higgins LL. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the oxford prosthesis in patients with medial compartment arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90 (1) 118-122
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Gulati A, Chau R, Simpson DJ, Dodd CA, Gill HS, Murray DW. Influence of component alignment on outcome for unicompartmental knee replacement. Knee 2009; 16 (3) 196-199
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Kanekasu K, Kondo M, Kadoya Y. Axial radiography of the distal femur to assess rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; (434) 193-197
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Takai S, Yoshino N, Isshiki T, Hirasawa Y. Kneeling view: a new roentgenographic technique to assess rotational deformity and alignment of the distal femur. J Arthroplasty 2003; 18 (4) 478-483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Goodfellow J. Unicompartmental Arthroplasty with the Oxford Knee. 1st ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2006
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Lewold S, Goodman S, Knutson K, Robertsson O, Lidgren L. Oxford meniscal bearing knee versus the Marmor knee in unicompartmental arthroplasty for arthrosis. A Swedish multicenter survival study. J Arthroplasty 1995; 10 (6) 722-731
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Song MH, Kim BH, Ahn SJ, Yoo SH, Lee MS. Early complications after minimally invasive mobile-bearing medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24 (8) 1281-1284
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley; 2003
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Shoukri MM, Asyali MH, Donner A. Sample size requirements for the design of reliability study: review and new results. Stat Methods Med Res 2004; 13: 251-271
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1 (8476): 307-310
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Gulati A, Chau R, Pandit HG , et al. The incidence of physiological radiolucency following Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement and its relationship to outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009; 91 (7) 896-902
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hopkins AR, New AM, Rodriguez-y-Baena F, Taylor M. Finite element analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Med Eng Phys 2010; 32 (1) 14-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 O'Connor J, Imran A. Bearing movement after Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a mathematical model. Orthopedics 2007; 30 (5, Suppl) 42-45
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Small SR, Berend ME, Ritter MA, Buckley CA. Bearing mobility affects tibial strain in mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int 2010; 19: 185-190
    PubMedGoogle Scholar