Effects of Femoral Component Design on the Deepest Point Position of the Trochlear Grove in Kinematically Aligned Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Comparison of Four Prothesis Designs

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The aim of the study is to explore and compare the differences in trochlear shape and knee anatomy between four types of prostheses and preoperative native knee matched with preoperative computed tomography (CT). Thirty patients were scheduled for primary kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for varus knee osteoarthritis at our hospital and the region between their pelvis to ankle joint was simulated using a CT-based three-dimensional planning software. The axial plane containing the transepicondylar axis was set as Slice A, and the 10-mm distal plane from Slice A was set as Slice B. The distances to the deepest trochlear groove between the native knee and each prosthesis and the medial and lateral facet heights were compared among the four groups. The deepest femoral trochlear groove of the prostheses was located 1.6 to 3.0 mm more medial than that of the native knee, and in the Persona group, it was significantly more medial than in the e-motion or Triathlon groups on both Slices A and B. The native knee and the medial and lateral facet heights of the four prostheses on both Slices A and B were significantly lower than those of preoperative native knees when femoral prostheses were set in the kinematically aligned (KA)-TKA position. The deepest point of the trochlear groove of the Persona group was the most medial among the four prostheses studied, and the deepest points differed depending on the prosthesis design in KA-TKA. Thus, surgeons should carefully select the type of prostheses used in KA-TKA.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committees and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Institutional Review Board approval for the study was provided by Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine (No. 170000).

Authors' Contributions

All authors, specifically M.T., N.N., and Y.T. have made substantial contributions to the conception and design, drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content. All authors contributed toward acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data and final approval of the version to be submitted.

Availability of Data and Material

The datasets during and/or analyzed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Publication History

Received: 30 November 2021

Accepted: 26 July 2022

Article published online:
23 September 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

• References

• 1 Fang DM, Ritter MA, Davis KE. Coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty: just how important is it?. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24 (Suppl. 06) 39-43
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Insall JN, Binazzi R, Soudry M, Mestriner LA. Total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1985; (192) 13-22
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Longstaff LM, Sloan K, Stamp N, Scaddan M, Beaver R. Good alignment after total knee arthroplasty leads to faster rehabilitation and better function. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24 (04) 570-578
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Baker PN, van der Meulen JH, Lewsey J, Gregg PJ. National Joint Registry for England and Wales, Data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. The role of pain and function in determining patient satisfaction after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007; 89 (07) 893-900
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KD. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468 (01) 57-63
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Howell SM, Papadopoulos S, Kuznik KT, Hull ML. Accurate alignment and high function after kinematically aligned TKA performed with generic instruments. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013; 21 (10) 2271-2280
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Leopold SS. Editor's Spotlight/Take 5: the Chitranjan S. Ranawat Award: no difference in 2-year functional outcomes using kinematic versus mechanical alignment in TKA: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2017; 475 (01) 4-8
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Schiraldi M, Bonzanini G, Chirillo D, de Tullio V. Mechanical and kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Ann Transl Med 2016; 4 (07) 130
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Nedopil AJ, Howell SM, Rudert M, Roth J, Hull ML. How frequent is rotational mismatch within 0° ± 10° in kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty?. Orthopedics 2013; 36 (12) e1515-e1520
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Park A, Duncan ST, Nunley RM, Keeney JA, Barrack RL, Nam D. Relationship of the posterior femoral axis of the “kinematically aligned” total knee arthroplasty to the posterior condylar, transepicondylar, and anteroposterior femoral axes. Knee 2014; 21 (06) 1120-1123
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Brar AS, Howell SM, Hull ML, Mahfouz MR. Does kinematic alignment and flexion of a femoral component designed for mechanical alignment reduce the proximal and lateral reach of the trochlea?. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31 (08) 1808-1813
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Lozano R, Campanelli V, Howell S, Hull M. Kinematic alignment more closely restores the groove location and the sulcus angle of the native trochlea than mechanical alignment: implications for prosthetic design. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2019; 27 (05) 1504-1513
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Ishikawa M, Kuriyama S, Ito H, Furu M, Nakamura S, Matsuda S. Kinematic alignment produces near-normal knee motion but increases contact stress after total knee arthroplasty: a case study on a single implant design. Knee 2015; 22 (03) 206-212
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Matsumoto T, Takashima Y, Takayama K. et al. Comparison between single- and multi-radius prostheses used in modified kinematically aligned cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 2022; 35 (09) 1004-1009
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Miura M, Hagiwara S, Nakamura J, Wako Y, Kawarai Y, Ohtori S. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of computed tomography-based three-dimensional preoperative planning for primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (05) 1572-1578
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Sato T, Koga Y, Omori G. Three-dimensional lower extremity alignment assessment system: application to evaluation of component position after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2004; 19 (05) 620-628
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Matsumoto T, Takayama K, Ishida K, Hayashi S, Hashimoto S, Kuroda R. Radiological and clinical comparison of kinematically versus mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2017; 99-B (05) 640-646
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Matsumoto T, Takayama K, Ishida K. et al. Intraoperative soft tissue balance/kinematics and clinical evaluation of modified kinematically versus mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 2020; 33 (08) 777-784
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Tsubosaka M, Kamenaga T, Kuroda Y. et al. Accelerometer-based portable navigation system is useful for tibial bone cutting in modified kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 2021; 34 (08) 870-876
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Howell SM, Shelton TJ, Gill M, Hull ML. A cruciate-retaining implant can treat both knees of most windswept deformities when performed with calipered kinematically aligned TKA. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2021; 29 (02) 437-445
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Macri EM, d'Entremont AG, Crossley KM. et al. Alignment differs between patellofemoral osteoarthritis cases and matched controls: an upright 3D MRI study. J Orthop Res 2019; 37 (03) 640-648
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Rivière C, Dhaif F, Shah H. et al. Kinematic alignment of current TKA implants does not restore the native trochlear anatomy. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2018; 104 (07) 983-995
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods 2007; 39 (02) 175-191
  Google Scholar
• 24 Steinbrück A, Schröder C, Woiczinski M. et al. Mediolateral femoral component position in TKA significantly alters patella shift and femoral roll-back. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017; 25 (11) 3561-3568
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Courtney PM, Lee GC. Early outcomes of kinematic alignment in primary total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of the literature. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32 (06) 2028-2032.e1
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Nedopil AJ, Howell SM, Hull ML. What clinical characteristics and radiographic parameters are associated with patellofemoral instability after kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty?. Int Orthop 2017; 41 (02) 283-291
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Yoon JR, Han SB, Jee MK, Shin YS. Comparison of kinematic and mechanical alignment techniques in primary total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017; 96 (39) e8157
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 McConaghy K, Derr T, Molloy RM, Klika AK, Kurtz S, Piuzzi NS. Patellar management during total knee arthroplasty: a review. EFORT Open Rev 2021; 6 (10) 861-871
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Matz J, Lanting BA, Howard JL. Understanding the patellofemoral joint in total knee arthroplasty. Can J Surg 2019; 62 (01) 57-65
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Yoshii I, Whiteside LA, Anouchi YS. The effect of patellar button placement and femoral component design on patellar tracking in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992; (275) 211-219
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 D'Lima DD, Chen PC, Kester MA, Colwell Jr CW. Impact of patellofemoral design on patellofemoral forces and polyethylene stresses. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85-A (Suppl. 04) 85-93
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Boyd Jr AD, Ewald FC, Thomas WH, Poss R, Sledge CB. Long-term complications after total knee arthroplasty with or without resurfacing of the patella. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993; 75 (05) 674-681
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Petersilge WJ, Oishi CS, Kaufman KR, Irby SE, Colwell Jr CW. The effect of trochlear design on patellofemoral shear and compressive forces in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1994; (309) 124-130
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Stoddard JE, Deehan DJ, Bull AM, McCaskie AW, Amis AA. No difference in patellar tracking between symmetrical and asymmetrical femoral component designs in TKA. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2014; 22 (03) 534-542
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Barink M, Meijerink H, Verdonschot N, van Kampen A, de Waal Malefijt M. Asymmetrical total knee arthroplasty does not improve patella tracking: a study without patella resurfacing. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2007; 15 (02) 184-191
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Rivière C, Iranpour F, Harris S. et al. Differences in trochlear parameters between native and prosthetic kinematically or mechanically aligned knees. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2018; 104 (02) 165-170
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar