Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Surg Technol Int ; 28: 229-35, 2016 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27042778

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Proper ligament tension in flexion with posterior cruciate retaining (CR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has long been associated with clinical success. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of varying levels of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) release on the tibiofemoral kinematics and PCL strain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A computational analysis was performed and varying levels of PCL release were simulated. Tibiofemoral kinematics was evaluated. The maximum PCL strain was determined for each bundle to evaluate the risk of rupture based on the failure strain. RESULTS: The femoral AP position shifted anteriorly as the PCL stiffness was reduced. PCL strain in both bundles increased as stiffness was reduced. The model predicts that the AL bundle should not rupture for a 75% release. Risk of PM bundle rupture is greater than AL bundle. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that a partial PCL release impacts tibiofemoral kinematics and ligament tension and strain. The relationship is dynamic and care should be taken when seeking optimal balance intra-operatively.


Subject(s)
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee/methods , Knee Joint/physiopathology , Knee Joint/surgery , Models, Biological , Posterior Cruciate Ligament/physiopathology , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee/instrumentation , Computer Simulation , Elastic Modulus/physiology , Humans , Knee Prosthesis , Organ Sparing Treatments/methods , Posterior Cruciate Ligament/surgery , Prosthesis Fitting/methods , Range of Motion, Articular , Surgery, Computer-Assisted/methods , Tensile Strength/physiology , Treatment Outcome
2.
J Biomech Eng ; 130(2): 021014, 2008 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18412501

ABSTRACT

Understanding the differences in knee kinematic descriptions is important for comparing data from different laboratories and observing small but important changes within a set of knees. The purpose of this study was to identify how differences in fixed body femoral coordinate systems affect the described tibiofemoral and patellofemoral kinematics for cadaveric knee studies with no hip present. Different methods for describing kinematics were evaluated on a set of seven cadaveric knees during walking in a dynamic knee simulator. Three anatomical landmark coordinate systems, a partial helical axis, and an experimental setup-based system were examined. The results showed that flexion-extension was insensitive to differences in the kinematic systems tested, internal-external rotation was similar for most femoral coordinate systems although there were changes in absolute position, varus-valgus was the most sensitive to variations in flexion axis direction, and anterior-posterior motion was most sensitive to femoral origin location. Femoral coordinate systems that define the sagittal plane using anatomical landmarks and locate the flexion axis perpendicular to the femur's mechanical axis in the frontal plane were typically similar and described kinematics most consistently.


Subject(s)
Knee/physiology , Models, Anatomic , Range of Motion, Articular/physiology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee , Biomechanical Phenomena , Humans , Middle Aged
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...