Cargando…

A comparison of lateral release rates in fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: With increasing functional demands of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty, mobile-bearing (MB) implants were developed in an attempt to increase the functional outcome of such patients. In theory, with MB implants, the self-alignment should reduce the rate of lateral release of t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ferguson, K. B., Bailey, O., Anthony, I., James, P. J., Stother, I. G., Blyth, M. J. G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4441636/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25687656
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10195-015-0338-y
_version_ 1782372811497537536
author Ferguson, K. B.
Bailey, O.
Anthony, I.
James, P. J.
Stother, I. G.
Blyth, M. J. G.
author_facet Ferguson, K. B.
Bailey, O.
Anthony, I.
James, P. J.
Stother, I. G.
Blyth, M. J. G.
author_sort Ferguson, K. B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: With increasing functional demands of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty, mobile-bearing (MB) implants were developed in an attempt to increase the functional outcome of such patients. In theory, with MB implants, the self-alignment should reduce the rate of lateral release of the patella, which is usually performed to optimise patellofemoral mechanics. This study reports on the lateral release rates for the P.F.C. Sigma® MB posterior-stabilised total knee replacement (TKR) implant compared with its fixed-bearing (FB) equivalent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 352 patients undergoing TKR were randomly allocated to receive either MB (176 knees) or FB (176 knees) posterior-stabilised TKR. Further sub-randomisation into patellar resurfacing or retention was performed for both designs. The need for lateral patellar release was assessed during surgery using a ‘no thumb technique’, and after releasing the tourniquet if indicated. RESULTS: The lateral release rate was the same for FB (10 %) and MB implants (10 %) (p = 0.9). However, patellar resurfacing resulted in lower lateral release rates when compared to patellar retention (6 vs 14 %; p = 0.0179) especially in MB implants (3 %). CONCLUSIONS: It has been previously reported that alterations to the design of the P.F.C. system with a more anatomical trochlea in the femoral component improved patellar tracking. The addition of a rotating platform tibial component to the P.F.C. Sigma system has, on its own, had no impact on the lateral release rate in this study. Optimising patellar geometry by patellar resurfacing appears more important than tibial-bearing design. Although MB implants appear to reduce the need for lateral release in the P.F.C. Sigma Rotating Platform, this only occurs when the patellar geometry has been optimised with patellar resurfacing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4441636
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44416362015-05-28 A comparison of lateral release rates in fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty Ferguson, K. B. Bailey, O. Anthony, I. James, P. J. Stother, I. G. Blyth, M. J. G. J Orthop Traumatol Original Article BACKGROUND: With increasing functional demands of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty, mobile-bearing (MB) implants were developed in an attempt to increase the functional outcome of such patients. In theory, with MB implants, the self-alignment should reduce the rate of lateral release of the patella, which is usually performed to optimise patellofemoral mechanics. This study reports on the lateral release rates for the P.F.C. Sigma® MB posterior-stabilised total knee replacement (TKR) implant compared with its fixed-bearing (FB) equivalent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 352 patients undergoing TKR were randomly allocated to receive either MB (176 knees) or FB (176 knees) posterior-stabilised TKR. Further sub-randomisation into patellar resurfacing or retention was performed for both designs. The need for lateral patellar release was assessed during surgery using a ‘no thumb technique’, and after releasing the tourniquet if indicated. RESULTS: The lateral release rate was the same for FB (10 %) and MB implants (10 %) (p = 0.9). However, patellar resurfacing resulted in lower lateral release rates when compared to patellar retention (6 vs 14 %; p = 0.0179) especially in MB implants (3 %). CONCLUSIONS: It has been previously reported that alterations to the design of the P.F.C. system with a more anatomical trochlea in the femoral component improved patellar tracking. The addition of a rotating platform tibial component to the P.F.C. Sigma system has, on its own, had no impact on the lateral release rate in this study. Optimising patellar geometry by patellar resurfacing appears more important than tibial-bearing design. Although MB implants appear to reduce the need for lateral release in the P.F.C. Sigma Rotating Platform, this only occurs when the patellar geometry has been optimised with patellar resurfacing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2. Springer International Publishing 2015-02-17 2015-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4441636/ /pubmed/25687656 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10195-015-0338-y Text en © The Author(s) 2015 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Ferguson, K. B.
Bailey, O.
Anthony, I.
James, P. J.
Stother, I. G.
Blyth, M. J. G.
A comparison of lateral release rates in fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty
title A comparison of lateral release rates in fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty
title_full A comparison of lateral release rates in fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty
title_fullStr A comparison of lateral release rates in fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of lateral release rates in fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty
title_short A comparison of lateral release rates in fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty
title_sort comparison of lateral release rates in fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4441636/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25687656
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10195-015-0338-y
work_keys_str_mv AT fergusonkb acomparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty
AT baileyo acomparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty
AT anthonyi acomparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty
AT jamespj acomparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty
AT stotherig acomparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty
AT blythmjg acomparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty
AT fergusonkb comparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty
AT baileyo comparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty
AT anthonyi comparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty
AT jamespj comparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty
AT stotherig comparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty
AT blythmjg comparisonoflateralreleaseratesinfixedversusmobilebearingtotalkneearthroplasty