Cargando…
Primary posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: analysis of different instrumentation
BACKGROUND: Intercondylar femoral bone removal during posterior stabilized (PS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) makes many cruciate substituting implant designs less appealing than cruciate retaining implants. Bone stock conservation is considered fundamental in the prevision of future revision surger...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4223625/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25037275 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-014-0054-y |
_version_ | 1782343232456228864 |
---|---|
author | Indelli, Pier Francesco Marcucci, Massimiliano Graceffa, Angelo Charlton, Sophie Latella, Leonardo |
author_facet | Indelli, Pier Francesco Marcucci, Massimiliano Graceffa, Angelo Charlton, Sophie Latella, Leonardo |
author_sort | Indelli, Pier Francesco |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Intercondylar femoral bone removal during posterior stabilized (PS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) makes many cruciate substituting implant designs less appealing than cruciate retaining implants. Bone stock conservation is considered fundamental in the prevision of future revision surgeries. The purpose of this study was to compare the quantity of intercondylar bone removable during PS housing preparation using three contemporary PS TKA instrumentations. METHOD: We compared different box cutting jigs which were utilized for the PS housing of three popular PS knee prostheses. The bone removal area from every PS box cutting jig was three-dimensionally measured. RESULTS: Independently from the implant size, the cutting jig for a specific PS TKA always resected significantly less bone than the others: this difference was statistically significant, especially for small- to medium-sized total knee femoral components. CONCLUSION: This study does not establish a clinical relevance of removing more or less bone at primary TKA, but suggests that if a PS design is indicated, it is preferable to select a model which possibly resects less distal femoral bone. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4223625 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42236252014-11-08 Primary posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: analysis of different instrumentation Indelli, Pier Francesco Marcucci, Massimiliano Graceffa, Angelo Charlton, Sophie Latella, Leonardo J Orthop Surg Res Technical Note BACKGROUND: Intercondylar femoral bone removal during posterior stabilized (PS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) makes many cruciate substituting implant designs less appealing than cruciate retaining implants. Bone stock conservation is considered fundamental in the prevision of future revision surgeries. The purpose of this study was to compare the quantity of intercondylar bone removable during PS housing preparation using three contemporary PS TKA instrumentations. METHOD: We compared different box cutting jigs which were utilized for the PS housing of three popular PS knee prostheses. The bone removal area from every PS box cutting jig was three-dimensionally measured. RESULTS: Independently from the implant size, the cutting jig for a specific PS TKA always resected significantly less bone than the others: this difference was statistically significant, especially for small- to medium-sized total knee femoral components. CONCLUSION: This study does not establish a clinical relevance of removing more or less bone at primary TKA, but suggests that if a PS design is indicated, it is preferable to select a model which possibly resects less distal femoral bone. BioMed Central 2014-07-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4223625/ /pubmed/25037275 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-014-0054-y Text en Copyright © 2014 Indelli et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. |
spellingShingle | Technical Note Indelli, Pier Francesco Marcucci, Massimiliano Graceffa, Angelo Charlton, Sophie Latella, Leonardo Primary posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: analysis of different instrumentation |
title | Primary posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: analysis of different instrumentation |
title_full | Primary posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: analysis of different instrumentation |
title_fullStr | Primary posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: analysis of different instrumentation |
title_full_unstemmed | Primary posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: analysis of different instrumentation |
title_short | Primary posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: analysis of different instrumentation |
title_sort | primary posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: analysis of different instrumentation |
topic | Technical Note |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4223625/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25037275 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-014-0054-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT indellipierfrancesco primaryposteriorstabilizedtotalkneearthroplastyanalysisofdifferentinstrumentation AT marcuccimassimiliano primaryposteriorstabilizedtotalkneearthroplastyanalysisofdifferentinstrumentation AT graceffaangelo primaryposteriorstabilizedtotalkneearthroplastyanalysisofdifferentinstrumentation AT charltonsophie primaryposteriorstabilizedtotalkneearthroplastyanalysisofdifferentinstrumentation AT latellaleonardo primaryposteriorstabilizedtotalkneearthroplastyanalysisofdifferentinstrumentation |