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

Seung-Yup Lee; Ji-Hoon Bae; Dong-Won Suh; Han-Ju Kim; Hong-Chul Lim

doi:10.1055/s-0036-1581134

The Journal of Knee Surgery, Inhaltsverzeichnis

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

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul Barunsesang Hospital, Seoul, The Republic of Korea

,

Ji-Hoon Bae

²Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, The Republic of Korea

,

Dong-Won Suh

³Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Barunsesang Hospital Ringgold Standard Institution, Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, The Republic of Korea

,

Han-Ju Kim

²Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, The Republic of Korea

,

Hong-Chul Lim

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul Barunsesang Hospital, Seoul, The Republic of Korea

› Institutsangaben

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

Volltext

Referenzen

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
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
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
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
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
6 Goodfellow J. Unicompartmental Arthroplasty with the Oxford Knee. 1st ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2006
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
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
9 Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley; 2003
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
11 Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1 (8476): 307-310
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
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
14 O'Connor J, Imran A. Bearing movement after Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a mathematical model. Orthopedics 2007; 30 (5, Suppl) 42-45
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