Thekkumpurath Muhammed Shafi, Goyal Devansh, Kannan Arun
Department of Orthopaedics, Apollo Hospitals, Greams Road, Chennai, 600006 India.
Indian J Orthop. 2024 Nov 30;59(1):108-114. doi: 10.1007/s43465-024-01292-3. eCollection 2025 Jan.
Ultracongruent (UC) total knee replacement (TKR) designs, serving as alternatives to posterior stabilized (PS) and cruciate retaining (CR) designs, lack conclusive evidence regarding posterior femoral rollback. This study aimed to compare intraoperative posterior femoral rollback and maximal knee flexion between UC and PS inserts, addressing the paucity of literature on femoral rollback achieved with UC designs in total knee replacement.
A consecutive cohort of 20 patients undergoing robotic-assisted primary total knee replacement, posterior femoral rollback and maximal intraoperative knee flexion were assessed. Robotic imaging at varying flexion angles (0°, 45°, 90°, and 120°) was conducted after implanting femoral and tibial components with Ultracongruent and Posterior-Stabilized trial inserts. Femoral contact on the tibia was estimated as a percentage of the sagittal dimension of the tibial component with 0 representing the anterior edge and 100 representing the posterior edge of the tibial component.
In extension, UC inserts exhibited a statistically significant posterior contact point versus PS inserts (56.3 + 4.3 vs 53.5 + 5.3, = 0.003). Between 0 and 45° flexion, 13 of 20 UC inserts showed a paradoxical anterior translation exceeding 5%, unlike the PS group. At 90° flexion, both displayed consistent posterior femoral rollback, with PS inserts having a more posterior contact point (63.5 + 6.2 vs 67.2 + 5.1, = .008). At 120° flexion, rollback was similar (70.1 + 8.4 vs 71.3 + 8.4, = 0.128). Mean maximal flexion was 130° (SD = 6.87) and 133° (SD = 6.72) for UC and PS inserts, respectively ( = 0.0001).
The study indicates UC inserts achieve comparable posterior femoral rollback in deep flexion, supporting their alternative use, despite minor intraoperative flexion differences. However, paradoxical anterior translation in mid-flexion with UC inserts warrants further investigation into wear and clinical outcomes.
超全等(UC)全膝关节置换(TKR)设计作为后稳定型(PS)和保留交叉韧带型(CR)设计的替代方案,在股骨后滚方面缺乏确凿证据。本研究旨在比较UC和PS垫片术中的股骨后滚和最大膝关节屈曲度,以解决全膝关节置换中UC设计在股骨后滚方面文献匮乏的问题。
对连续20例行机器人辅助初次全膝关节置换的患者进行评估,测量股骨后滚和术中最大膝关节屈曲度。在植入带有超全等和后稳定型试验垫片的股骨和胫骨组件后,在不同屈曲角度(0°、45°、90°和120°)进行机器人成像。股骨与胫骨的接触情况以胫骨组件矢状径的百分比来估计,0代表胫骨组件的前缘,100代表后缘。
在伸直位时,UC垫片与PS垫片相比,后接触点具有统计学意义(56.3±4.3对53.5±5.3,P = 0.003)。在0至45°屈曲之间,20个UC垫片中有13个出现了超过5%的反常前向平移,这与PS组不同。在90°屈曲时,两者均显示出一致的股骨后滚,PS垫片的后接触点更靠后(63.5±6.2对67.2±5.1,P = 0.008)。在120°屈曲时,后滚情况相似(70.1±8.4对71.3±8.4,P = 0.128)。UC和PS垫片的平均最大屈曲度分别为130°(标准差 = 6.87)和133°(标准差 = 6.72)(P = 0.0001)。
该研究表明,尽管术中屈曲存在微小差异,但UC垫片在深度屈曲时能实现相当的股骨后滚,支持其作为替代方案使用。然而,UC垫片在屈曲中期出现的反常前向平移值得进一步研究其磨损情况和临床结果。