J Knee Surg 2019; 32(02): 192-195
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1635112
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Patellofemoral Imbalance in a Balanced Total Knee Arthroplasty: How Does it Occur?

Perry Jaymes Evangelista
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, New York
,
Nathan Lenz
2   Knee Product Development, Smith and Nephew Inc., Advanced Surgical Devices, Memphis, Tennessee
,
Scott Laster
2   Knee Product Development, Smith and Nephew Inc., Advanced Surgical Devices, Memphis, Tennessee
,
Neil P. Sheth
3   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
,
Ran Schwarzkopf
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, New York
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

10 August 2017

28 January 2018

Publication Date:
07 March 2018 (online)

Abstract

Despite the overall successful outcomes following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and the concept that a well-balanced TKA yields a more successful result, concerns still remain in the reported literature regarding the patellofemoral joint. Diminished outcomes have been associated with poorly balanced or placed patella implants. The effect of different techniques to achieve flexion–extension balance and the use of posterior stabilized (PS) versus cruciate retaining (CR) implant designs on patellofemoral balancing has not been previously studied. The purpose of this study is to utilize a validated computational analysis software to simulate the effects of varying implant positions and sizes of femoral components. The patellofemoral retinaculum (PFR) load was significantly affected by some conditions, while others did not reach significance. The proximal-distal implant position with knee flexion angle (p < 0.001), the implant size (p < 0.001), and the implant bearing type (CR/PS) (p < 0.05) were significant. For the proximal-distal implant position and knee flexion angle, a more proximal implant position (elevating the joint line) increased the PFR load from 15 to 30°, and a more proximal implant position reduced retinaculum load from 60 to 135°. However, at 45°, implant position does not affect retinaculum load. Achieving the appropriate balance between the dynamic nature of both the tibiofemoral and the patellofemoral interaction in TKA has proven to be complex and challenging to manage. Balancing of a TKA is essential to the proper functioning and overall longevity of the implant. These results demonstrate that patellofemoral balance is affected by implant size and position during flexion–extension gap balancing.

 
  • References

  • 1 Carr AJ, Robertsson O, Graves S. , et al. Knee replacement. Lancet 2012; 379 (9823): 1331-1340
  • 2 Hawker G, Wright J, Coyte P. , et al. Health-related quality of life after knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998; 80 (02) 163-173
  • 3 Talmo CT, Robbins CE, Bono JV. Total joint replacement in the elderly patient. Clin Geriatr Med 2010; 26 (03) 517-529
  • 4 Nagai K, Muratsu H, Matsumoto T, Takahara S, Kuroda R, Kurosaka M. Influence of intraoperative soft tissue balance on postoperative active knee extension in posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30 (07) 1155-1159
  • 5 Mitsuyasu H, Matsuda S, Fukagawa S. , et al. Enlarged post-operative posterior condyle tightens extension gap in total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 93 (09) 1210-1216
  • 6 Muratsu H, Matsumoto T, Kubo S. , et al. Femoral component placement changes soft tissue balance in posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2010; 25 (09) 926-930
  • 7 Berend ME, Small SR, Ritter MA, Buckley CA, Merk JC, Dierking WK. Effects of femoral component size on proximal tibial strain with anatomic graduated components total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2010; 25 (01) 58-63
  • 8 Eisenhuth SA, Saleh KJ, Cui Q, Clark CR, Brown TE. Patellofemoral instability after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 446 (446) 149-160
  • 9 Lewonowski K, Dorr LD, McPherson EJ, Huber G, Wan Z. Medialization of the patella in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1997; 12 (02) 161-167
  • 10 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
  • 11 Brick GW, Scott RD. The patellofemoral component of total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988; (231) 163-178
  • 12 Ellison P, Barton DC, Esler C, Shaw DL, Stone MH, Fisher J. In vitro simulation and quantification of wear within the patellofemoral joint replacement. J Biomech 2008; 41 (07) 1407-1416
  • 13 Leopold SS, Silverton CD, Barden RM, Rosenberg AG. Isolated revision of the patellar component in total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85-A (01) 41-47
  • 14 Koshino T, Ejima M, Okamoto R, Morii T. Gradual low riding of the patella during postoperative course after total knee arthroplasty in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. J Arthroplasty 1990; 5 (04) 323-327
  • 15 Weale AE, Murray DW, Newman JH, Ackroyd CE. The length of the patellar tendon after unicompartmental and total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1999; 81 (05) 790-795
  • 16 Gatha NM, Clarke HD, Fuchs R, Scuderi GR, Insall JN. Factors affecting postoperative range of motion after total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 2004; 17 (04) 196-202
  • 17 Singh J, Politis A, Loucks L, Hedden DR, Bohm ER. Trends in revision hip and knee arthroplasty observations after implementation of a regional joint replacement registry. Can J Surg 2016; 59 (05) 304-310
  • 18 Sasaki H, Kubo S, Matsumoto T. , et al. The influence of patella height on intra-operative soft tissue balance in posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012; 20 (11) 2191-2196
  • 19 Lee TQ, Gerken AP, Glaser FE, Kim WC, Anzel SH. Patellofemoral joint kinematics and contact pressures in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997; (340) 257-266
  • 20 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
  • 21 Konno T, Onodera T, Nishio Y, Kasahara Y, Iwasaki N, Majima T. Correlation between knee kinematics and patellofemoral contact pressure in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (12) 2305-2308
  • 22 Matz J, Howard JL, Morden DJ, MacDonald SJ, Teeter MG, Lanting BA. Do changes in patellofemoral joint offset lead to adverse outcomes in total knee arthroplasty with patellar resurfacing? A radiographic review. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32 (03) 783-787