Implant Size Availability Affects Reproduction of Distal Femoral Anatomy

Abstract

A total knee arthroplasty system offers more distal femoral implant anterior–posterior (AP) sizes than its predecessor. The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of increased size availability on an implant system's ability to reproduce the AP dimension of the native distal femur. We measured 200 cadaveric femora with the AP-sizing guides of Zimmer (Warsaw, IN) NexGen (8 sizes) and Zimmer Persona (12 sizes) total knee arthroplasty systems. We defined “size deviation” as the difference in the AP dimension between the anatomic size of the native femur and the closest implant size. We defined satisfactory reproduction of distal femoral dimensions as < 1 mm difference between the implant and native femur size. The NexGen system was associated with a mean 0.46 mm greater implant size deviation than Persona (p < 0.001). When using a 1 mm size deviation as a cutoff for satisfactory replication of the native distal femoral anatomy, 85/200 specimens (42.5%) were a poor fit by NexGen, but a satisfactory fit by Persona. Only 1/200 specimens (0.5%) was a poor fit by Persona, but a satisfactory fit by NexGen (p < 0.001). The novel knee system with 12 versus 8 sizes reproduces the AP dimension of the native distal femur more closely than its predecessor. Further study is needed to determine the clinical impact of these differences.

Keywords

total knee arthroplasty - cadaveric study - implant sizing - implant personalization

• References

• 1 Kim YH, Choi Y, Kim JS. Comparison of a standard and a gender-specific posterior cruciate-substituting high-flexion knee prosthesis: a prospective, randomized, short-term outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92 (10) 1911-1920
• 2 Song EK, Jung WB, Yoon TR, Park KS, Seo HY, Seon JK. Comparison of outcomes after bilateral simultaneous total knee arthroplasty using gender-specific and unisex knees. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27 (2) 226-231
• 3 Singh H, Mittal V, Nadkarni B, Agarwal S, Gulati D. Gender-specific high-flexion knee prosthesis in Indian women: a prospective randomised study. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2012; 20 (2) 153-156
• 4 Tanavalee A, Rojpornpradit T, Khumrak S, Ngarmukos S. The early results of gender-specific total knee arthroplasty in Thai patients. Knee 2011; 18 (6) 483-487
• 5 Xie X, Lin L, Zhu B, Lu Y, Lin Z, Li Q. Will gender-specific total knee arthroplasty be a better choice for women? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2014; 24 (8) 1341-1349
• 6 Thomsen MG, Husted H, Bencke J, Curtis D, Holm G, Troelsen A. Do we need a gender-specific total knee replacement? A randomised controlled trial comparing a high-flex and a gender-specific posterior design. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012; 94 (6) 787-792
• 7 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33 (1) 159-174
• 8 Bellemans J, Banks S, Victor J, Vandenneucker H, Moemans A. Fluoroscopic analysis of the kinematics of deep flexion in total knee arthroplasty. Influence of posterior condylar offset. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2002; 84 (1) 50-53
• 9 Hanratty BM, Thompson NW, Wilson RK, Beverland DE. The influence of posterior condylar offset on knee flexion after total knee replacement using a cruciate-sacrificing mobile-bearing implant. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007; 89 (7) 915-918
• 10 Bauer T, Biau D, Colmar M, Poux X, Hardy P, Lortat-Jacob A. Influence of posterior condylar offset on knee flexion after cruciate-sacrificing mobile-bearing total knee replacement: a prospective analysis of 410 consecutive cases. Knee 2010; 17 (6) 375-380
• 11 Arabori M, Matsui N, Kuroda R , et al. Posterior condylar offset and flexion in posterior cruciate-retaining and posterior stabilized TKA. J Orthop Sci 2008; 13 (1) 46-50
• 12 Ishii Y, Noguchi H, Takeda M, Sato J, Toyabe S. Posterior condylar offset does not correlate with knee flexion after TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471 (9) 2995-3001
• 13 Otani T, Whiteside LA, White SE. Cutting errors in preparation of femoral components in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1993; 8 (5) 503-510
• 14 Nakahara H, Matsuda S, Okazaki K, Tashiro Y, Iwamoto Y. Sagittal cutting error changes femoral anteroposterior sizing in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (12) 3560-3565
• 15 Plaskos C, Hodgson AJ, Inkpen K, McGraw RW. Bone cutting errors in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2002; 17 (6) 698-705
• 16 Bäthis H, Perlick L, Tingart M, Perlick C, Lüring C, Grifka J. Intraoperative cutting errors in total knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2005; 125 (1) 16-20
• 17 Wetzel RJ, Shah RR, Puri L. Demonstration of saw blade accuracy and excursion: a cadaveric comparison study of blade types used in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28 (6) 985-987
• 18 Nakahara H, Matsuda S, Moro-oka TA, Okazaki K, Tashiro Y, Iwamoto Y. Cutting error of the distal femur in total knee arthroplasty by use of a navigation system. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27 (6) 1119-1122
• 19 Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89 (4) 780-785
• 20 Suter LG, Paltiel AD, Rome BN , et al. Placing a price on medical device innovation: the example of total knee arthroplasty. PLoS ONE 2013; 8 (5) e62709