Laboratorio di Biomeccanica e Innovazione Tecnologica, Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via di Barbiano 1/10, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012 Mar;20(3):552-8. doi: 10.1007/s00167-011-1604-z. Epub 2011 Jul 14.
No study, up to now, has examined the effect of arthritis on pathologic subjects using functional flexion axis (FFA). The purpose of this study is to understand whether arthritis affects somehow the FFA evaluation and to assess whether the FFA could be considered a usable reference for implant positioning for osteoarthritic knees.
Using a navigation system, FFA orientation was evaluated intraoperatively (computed with the mean helical axis method) in three different ranges of motion (0°-120°; 35°-80°; 35°-120°) and in two different planes (coronal and axial), for 111 osteoarthritis patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. The results were compared with a control group of 60 patients that underwent ACL reconstruction. The angle between the transepicondylar axis (TEA) and FFA was computed.
Results showed in arthritic knees on frontal plane, an average difference between TEA and FFA of -2.8° ± 5.0° while on axial plane it was 0.6° ± 4.7°. No statistical difference was found between the three ranges in axial view, whereas some difference was found in frontal view (P < 0.0001). The TEA-FFA angle was not correlated with limb alignment on axial plane, while it was, even if poor, in frontal plane. In the control group, in frontal and in axial view, no statistical difference was found for the angle between TEA and FFA.
FFA can be used as reference for implant positioning in axial plane also in pathologic knees, while for the frontal plane further investigations are required.
迄今为止,尚无研究使用功能屈膝轴(FFA)检查关节炎对病理受试者的影响。本研究旨在了解关节炎是否会对 FFA 评估产生影响,并评估 FFA 是否可作为治疗骨关节炎膝关节的植入物定位的有用参考。
使用导航系统,在三个不同的运动范围(0°-120°;35°-80°;35°-120°)和两个不同的平面(冠状面和矢状面)下,对 111 例接受全膝关节置换术的骨关节炎患者进行了术中 FFA 方向评估(使用平均螺旋轴方法计算)。将结果与 60 例接受 ACL 重建术的对照组进行比较。计算了髁间轴(TEA)与 FFA 之间的夹角。
在冠状面上,关节炎膝关节的结果显示 TEA 和 FFA 之间的平均差异为-2.8°±5.0°,而在矢状面上则为 0.6°±4.7°。在矢状面视图中,三个范围之间没有发现统计学差异,而在冠状面视图中则存在一些差异(P<0.0001)。TEA-FFA 角与轴向平面上的肢体对线无相关性,而在冠状平面上则存在相关性,尽管相关性较差。在对照组中,在冠状面和矢状面视图中,TEA 和 FFA 之间的角度没有统计学差异。
FFA 可作为轴向平面中病理膝关节植入物定位的参考,而对于冠状面,还需要进一步研究。