A868. BODY MASS INDEX COMPARISON OF KNEE KINEMATICS FOR OBESE, OVERWEIGHT AND NORMAL WEIGHT TKA SUBJECTS

Abstract

All over the world, obesity rates are on the rise. Medical complications and increased health risks are often associated with being overweight or obese, but a thorough understanding of in vivo motions for obese, overweight and normal weight subjects does not exist. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare knee kinematics in TKA subjects by body mass index (BMI).

In vivo knee kinematics were determined for 253 TKA subjects during a Deep Knee Bend (DKB) from full extension to maximum flexion using a 3D to 2D image registration technique. Each of these subjects was then classified into one of three BMI categories: obese (BMI greater than or equal to 30), overweight (BMI greater than or equal to 25 and less than 30) and normal weight (BMI less than 25 and greater than or equal to 18.5). Subjects were provided by 11 surgeons using ten different TKA devices. All subjects were deemed clinically successful.

On average, weight bearing range of motion (ROM) for the obese (n=79), overweight (n=113) and normal weight (n=61) groups were 107.7° (range: 74° to 136°, standard deviation (σ) =14.9°), 109.6° (60° to 150°, σ=17.5°) and 114.1° (72° to 147°, σ=14.4), respectively. ROM of 90° or less was seen in 16.5% of the obese subjects, 14.2% of the overweigh subjects and 6.6% of the normal weight subjects. ROM of 125° or more was seen in 15.2% of the obese subjects, 16.8% of the overweight subjects and 23.0% of the normal weight subjects.

From full extension to maximum flexion the obese, overweight and normal weight groups averaged 8.65° (−5.14° to 22.51°, σ=6.22°), 7.58° (−2.85° to 24.72°, σ=5.71°) and 5.72° (−4.84° to 19.43°, σ=5.65°) of axial rotation. Axial rotation of 3° or less was seen in 20.25% of the obese subjects, 23.01% of the overweight subjects and 39.34% of the normal weight subjects. Axial rotation of greater than 9° was seen in 51.90% of the obese subjects, 35.40% of the overweight subjects and 26.23% of the normal weight subjects. Opposite axial rotation was seen in 8.86% of the subjects in the obese group, 9.73% of the overweight group and 9.84% of the normal weight group.

On average, from full extension to maximum flexion, the medial condyle for the obese, overweight and normal weight groups experienced −5.44mm (−22.20mm to 8.04mm, σ=7.9mm), −6.30mm (−25.22mm to 5.35mm, σ=7.36mm) and −4.78mm (−20.79mm to 5.49mm, σ=6.68mm) of posterior femoral rollback (PFR), respectively. The obese, overweight and normal weight groups averaged −12.66 mm (−34.57mm to 0.34mm, σ=9.32mm), −12.38mm (−36.72mm to 1.83mm, σ=10.33mm) and −9.39 mm (−34.55mm to 0.35mm, σ=8.98mm) of lateral PFR, respectively.

Condylar lift-off of greater than 1mm was seen in 16.46% of obese subjects, 10.62% of overweight subjects and 11.48% of normal weight subjects.

Various statistical differences were seen across the groups. The normal weight subjects had significantly higher ROM that the obese subjects (p=0.0184), while there was no difference seen between the normal weight and overweight groups or the overweight and obese groups. The obese and the overweight groups had significantly more axial rotation than the normal weight group from 0° to 90°, 0° to maximum flexion, 30° to 90°, 30° to maximum flexion and 60° to 90°. There were a significantly higher number of cases of condylar lift-off for obese subjects when compared to both normal weight and overweight groups.

It can be concluded that body mass index does play a factor in TKA kinematics.