Abstract
Introduction
There are over ½ million total knee replacement (TKR) procedures performed each year in the United States and is projected to increase to over 3.48 million by 2030. Concurrent with the increase in TKR procedures is a trend of younger patients receiving knee implants (under the age of 65). These younger patients are known to have a 5% lower implant survival rate at 8 years post-op compared to older patients (65+ years), and they are also known to live more active lifestyles that place higher demands on the durability and functional performance of the TKR device. Conventional TKR designs increase articular conformity to increase stability, but these articular constraints decrease patient range of knee motion, often limiting key measures of femoral rollback, A/P motion, and deep knee flexion. Without this articular constraint however, many patients report TKR “instability” during activities such as walking and stair descent, which can significantly impede confidence of movement. Therefore, there is a need for a TKR system that can offer enhanced stability while also maintaining active ranges of motion.
Materials and Methods
A novel knee arthroplasty system has been designed that uses synthetic ligament systems that can be surgically replaced, to provide ligamentous stability and natural motion to increase the functional performance of the implant. A computational anatomical model (AnyBody) was developed that incorporated ligaments into an existing Journey II TKR. Ligaments were modeled and given biomechanical properties from literature. Simulated A/P drawer tests and knee flexion were analyzed for 2,916 possible cruciate ligament location and length combinations to determine the effects on the A/P stability of the TKR. A physical model was then constructed, and the design was verified by performing 110 N A/P drawer tests under 710 N of simulated body weight.
Results and Discussion
As ACL insertion location moved posteriorly on the femur, it was found to decrease ACL ligament strain, enabling a higher range of flexion. In general, as ACL and PCL length increased, the A/P laxity of the TKR system increased linearly. Range of motion was found to be more dependent on ligament attachment location, and laxity was more dependent on ligament length. In this work, TKR stability was clearly affected by changes in synthetic ligament length and location. When comparing the laxity between a TKR with and without ligaments, the TKR with synthetic ligaments experienced significantly less displacement than a TKR without synthetic ligaments.
Conclusions
The stability of a TKR can be increased while maintaining range of motion by incorporating synthetic ligaments into its design. The effectiveness of the ligaments was clearly dependent on two factors: length and location. It is imperative to the success of the implant to obtain the correct lengths and locations because improper placement or length can impact the outcome significantly. These results emphasize the need for a knee replacement that incorporates synthetic ligaments, with calibrated location and lengths, to significantly influence stability and possible kinematic performance of the TKR system, and potentially influencing long-term functional outcomes.
