Patient function after a posterior stabilizing total knee arthroplasty: cam–post engagement and knee kinematics

Even though posterior substituting total knee arthroplasty has been widely used in surgery, how the cam–post mechanism (posterior substituting mechanism) affects knee joint kinematics and function in patients is not known. The objective of the present study was to investigate posterior femoral translation, internal tibial rotation, tibiofemoral contact, and cam–post engagement of total knee arthroplasty patients during in vivo weight-bearing flexion. Twenty-four knees with a PS TKA were investigated while performing a single leg weight-bearing lunge from full extension to maximum flexion as images were recorded using a dual fluoroscopic system. The in vivo knee position at each targeted flexion angle was reproduced using 3D TKA models and the fluoroscopic images. The kinematics of the knee was measured from the series of the total knee arthroplasty models. The cam–post engagement was determined when the surface model of the femoral cam overlapped with that of the tibial post. The mean maximum flexion angle for all the subjects was 112.5 ± 13.1°. The mean flexion angle where cam–post engagement was observed was 91.1 ± 10.9°. The femur moved anteriorly from 0° to 30° and posteriorly through the rest of the flexion range. The internal tibial rotation increased approximately 6° from full extension to 90° of flexion and decreased slightly with further flexion. Both the medial and lateral contact point moved posteriorly from 0° to 30°, remained relatively constant from 30° to 90°, and then moved further posterior from 90° to maximum flexion. The in vivo cam–post engagement corresponded to increased posterior translation and reduced internal tibial rotation at high flexion of the posterior substituting total knee arthroplasty. The initial cam–post engagement was also mildly correlated with the maximum flexion angle of the knee (R = 0.51, p = 0.019). A later cam–post engagement might indicate an environment conducive to greater flexion. If the factors that affect cam–post engagement timing can be established, proper manipulation of those factors may improve the function of the knee after posterior substituting total knee arthroplasty.

[1]  Todd Johnson,et al.  Biomechanics of Posterior-Substituting Total Knee Arthroplasty: An In Vitro Study , 2002, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[2]  A. Baldini,et al.  Comparison of mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study. , 2005, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[3]  M. Ritter,et al.  Predicting Range of Motion After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Clustering, Log-Linear Regression, and Regression Tree Analysis , 2003, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[4]  R. Komistek,et al.  In vivo kinematic evaluation and design considerations related to high flexion in total knee arthroplasty. , 2005, Journal of biomechanics.

[5]  D. Dennis,et al.  A Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty Shows Condylar Lift-off during Deep Knee Bends , 2005, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[6]  Todd Johnson,et al.  Three-dimensional tibiofemoral articular contact kinematics of a cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[7]  J. Seon,et al.  Comparison of range of motion of high-flexion prosthesis and mobile-bearing prosthesis in total knee arthroplasty. , 2005, Orthopedics.

[8]  S. Delp,et al.  Posterior tilting of the tibial component decreases femoral rollback in posterior‐substituting knee replacement: A computer simulation study , 1998, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[9]  Gwo‐Jaw Wang,et al.  The early results of high-flex total knee arthroplasty: a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. , 2005, The Journal of arthroplasty.

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

[11]  Guoan Li,et al.  Investigation of in vivo 6DOF total knee arthoplasty kinematics using a dual orthogonal fluoroscopic system , 2006, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[12]  I. Pinder,et al.  Survivorship analysis of the Kinematic Stabilizer total knee replacement: a 10- to 14-year follow-up. , 1996, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[13]  José A. Rodriguez,et al.  The Press-Fit Condylar Modular Total Knee System. Four-to-Six-Year Results with a Posterior-Cruciate-Substituting Design* , 1997, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

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

[15]  J. Bellemans,et al.  Kinematics of posterior cruciate ligament-retaining and -substituting total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised outcome study. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[16]  Mohamed R. Mahfouz,et al.  In Vivo Fluoroscopic Analysis Of Fixed-Bearing Total Knee Replacements , 2003, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[17]  S L Delp,et al.  Tradeoffs between motion and stability in posterior substituting knee arthroplasty design. , 1995, Journal of biomechanics.

[18]  Alberto Leardini,et al.  Femoral rollback of cruciate‐retaining and posterior‐stabilized total knee replacements: In vivo fluoroscopic analysis during activities of daily living , 2006, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[19]  J. Tamura,et al.  In Vivo Three-Dimensional Knee Kinematics Using a Biplanar Image-Matching Technique , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[20]  Harry E Rubash,et al.  Knee kinematics with a high-flexion posterior stabilized total knee prosthesis: an in vitro robotic experimental investigation. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[21]  A Leardini,et al.  Influence of tibial component posterior slope on in vivo knee kinematics in fixed‐bearing total knee arthroplasty , 2006, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[22]  T. Gill,et al.  Function of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Bundles during in Vivo Knee Flexion , 2007, The American journal of sports medicine.

[23]  J B Stiehl,et al.  Range of motion after total knee arthroplasty: the effect of implant design and weight-bearing conditions. , 1998, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[24]  Young-Hoo Kim,et al.  Range of motion of standard and high-flexion posterior stabilized total knee prostheses. A prospective, randomized study. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[25]  Scott A. Banks,et al.  Comparing in vivo kinematics of anterior cruciate-retaining and posterior cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty , 2006, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.

[26]  G. Scuderi**,et al.  Component asymmetry in simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty. , 2006, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[27]  J. Elting,et al.  Range of Motion in Total Knee Replacement , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[28]  Johan Kärrholm,et al.  In vivo kinematics of total knee arthroplasty , 2000 .