The Knee, ISSN: 1873-5800, Vol: 22, Issue: 1, Page: 18-23

Variations in morphological characteristics of prostheses for total knee arthroplasty leading to kinematic differences

Shi, Xiaojun; Zhou, Zongke; Shen, Bin; Yang, Jing; Kang, Pengde; Pei, Fuxing
Knee

Background and purpose

The aim of this study is to compare kinematics during weight-bearing deep knee-bending motion in patients after bilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKA) of two types: 1) a conventional ScorpioFlex prosthesis and 2) a contemporary redesigned non-restrictive-geometry (NRG) prosthesis installed by the same surgeon.

Methods

We enrolled 15 patients who underwent conventional ScorpioFlex posterior-stabilised TKA in one knee and contemporary NRG TKA on the contralateral side (the same surgeon). During fluoroscopic examination, each patient performed weight-bearing deep knee bending. Motions among all components were analysed using a two- to three-dimensional registration technique.

Results

The mean maximum flexion was 108° (SD 8) and 120° (SD 9) after ScorpioFlex and NRG TKAs, respectively; there were statistically significant differences between the groups. From extension to maximal flexion, the medial condyle translated by 4.8 mm (SD 1.2) and 5.4 mm (SD 2.4) posteriorly after ScorpioFlex TKA and NRG TKA, respectively. The lateral femoral condyle moved 8.4 mm (SD 1.5) and 12.2 mm (SD 2.1) posteriorly after ScorpioFlex TKA and NRG TKA, respectively. There were no significant differences in medial condyle translation between the groups except for the lateral condyle. The total amount of tibial axial rotation during extension to flexion was 5.1° (SD 1.8) after ScorpioFlex and 13.2° (SD 3.4) after NRG TKAs; there were statistically significant differences between the groups.

Conclusions

NRG resulted in much better maximum flexion, lateral condyle movement and tibial internal rotation than did ScorpioFlex TKAs. The observed kinematic differences are most likely caused by variations in the morphological characteristics of the two implants.

Level of evidence

Level I, Prospective randomed comparative study.

Download article