KEN OKAZAKI
   Department   School of Medicine(Tokyo Women's Medical University Hospital), School of Medicine
   Position   Professor and Division head
Article types Original article
Language English
Peer review Peer reviewed
Title In vivo kinematics of gait in posterior-stabilized and bicruciate-stabilized total knee arthroplasties using image-matching techniques.
Journal Formal name：International orthopaedics
Abbreviation：Int Orthop
ISSN code：14325195/03412695
Domestic / ForeginForegin
Volume, Issue, Page 42(11),pp.2573-2581
Author and coauthor Murakami Koji, Hamai Satoshi, Okazaki Ken, Wang Yifeng, Ikebe Satoru, Higaki Hidehiko, Shimoto Takeshi, Mizu-Uchi Hideki, Akasaki Yukio, Nakashima Yasuharu
Publication date 2018/11
Summary PURPOSE:This study aimed to evaluate the effects of two types of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs: posterior-stabilized (PS) and bicruciate-stabilized (BCS) on in vivo kinematics during gait.METHODS:Continuous X-ray images of the gait were taken using a flat panel detector for 23 PS and BCS TKAs. We analyzed the tibiofemoral implant flexion angle, anteroposterior (AP) translation, axial rotation, and anterior/posterior cam-post contact using image-matching techniques.RESULTS:Double knee actions were demonstrated for the PS and BCS design (35 and 61%, respectively, p = 0.08). The tibiofemoral AP positions were significantly more posterior at peak extension (- 1.7 ± 2.2 and 1.0 ± 2.5 mm, respectively, p < 0.01) and anterior at peak flexion (1.3 ± 2.3 and - 0.8 ± 2.8 mm, respectively, p = 0.01) for the PS design than for the BCS design, with a significant difference in AP translation (3.0 ± 3.9 mm anterior and 1.7 ± 2.8 mm posterior, respectively, p < 0.01). Anterior/posterior tibial post contacts were found in 83/4% and 74/30% for the PS and BCS designs, respectively, with a significant difference in posterior contact (p = 0.72/0.04, respectively).CONCLUSION:The knee flexion pattern, tibiofemoral AP translation, axial rotation, and cam-post contact during gait varied, depending on the type of implant, the PS and BCS designs.
DOI 10.1007/s00264-018-3921-z
PMID 29623458