In vivo kinematic comparison of posterior cruciate-retaining and posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasties under passive and weight-bearing conditions.

An in vivo comparison of flexion kinematics for posterior cruciate-retaining (PCR) and posterior stabilized (PS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was performed. Twenty patients who underwent bilateral paired TKAs were included in this prospective study. Both PCR and PS prostheses were from the same TKA series with comparable surface geometries, and all were implanted by a single surgeon. Of these 20 patients, 3-dimensional kinematics during flexion could be analyzed using a computer model fitting technique in 18 patients. The follow-up period ranged from 18 to 53 months. In the PCR TKA, an anterior femoral translation from 30 degrees to 60 degrees of flexion was observed in the weight-bearing condition. In contrast, flexion kinematics for the PS TKA was characterized by the maintenance of a constant contact position under weight-bearing conditions and posterior femoral rollback in passive flexion.

[1]  T P Andriacchi,et al.  Retention of the posterior cruciate in total knee arthroplasty. , 1988, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[2]  J Perry,et al.  Functional comparison of posterior cruciate-retained versus cruciate-sacrificed total knee arthroplasty. , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[3]  Stefan M. Gabriel,et al.  Three-dimensional determination of femoral-tibial contact positions under in vivo conditions using fluoroscopy. , 1998, Clinical biomechanics.

[4]  S A Banks,et al.  The mechanics of knee replacements during gait. In vivo fluoroscopic analysis of two designs. , 1997, The American journal of knee surgery.

[5]  T. Andriacchi,et al.  The influence of total knee-replacement design on walking and stair-climbing. , 1982, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  D A Dennis,et al.  In Vivo Anteroposterior Femorotibial Translation of Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Analysis , 1998, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[7]  J B Stiehl,et al.  Femoral condylar lift-off in vivo in total knee arthroplasty. , 2001, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[8]  S. Banks,et al.  Fluoroscopic analysis of the kinematics of deep flexion in total knee arthroplasty. Influence of posterior condylar offset. , 2002, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[9]  M. Freeman,et al.  Should the posterior cruciate ligament be retained or resected in condylar nonmeniscal knee arthroplasty? The case for resection. , 1988, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[10]  P. Faris,et al.  Bilateral total knee arthroplasty. One cruciate retaining and one cruciate substituting. , 1991, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[11]  Richard D Komistek,et al.  In vivo comparison of femorotibial contact positions for press-fit posterior stabilized and posterior cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasties. , 2002, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[12]  J B Stiehl,et al.  The cruciate ligaments in total knee arthroplasty: a kinematic analysis of 2 total knee arthroplasties. , 2000, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[13]  F. Jaffe,et al.  Posterior cruciate ligament-sparing versus posterior cruciate ligament-sacrificing arthroplasty. Functional results using the same prosthesis. , 1998, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[14]  S A Banks,et al.  In vivo kinematics of cruciate-retaining and -substituting knee arthroplasties. , 1997, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[15]  D A Dennis,et al.  In Vivo Knee Kinematics Derived Using an Inverse Perspective Technique , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.