header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

SAGITTAL STABILITY OF MEDIAL PIVOT TOTAL KNEE ARTHOPLASTY COMPARED WITH OTHER IMPLANT DESIGNS

International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty (ISTA) 31st Annual Congress, London, England, October 2018. Part 2.



Abstract

Introduction

In total knee arthroplasty, the aim is to relieve pain and provide a stable, functional knee. Sagittal stability is crucial in enabling a patient to return to functional activities. Knee implants with a medial pivot (MP) design are thought to more accurately reproduce the mechanics of the native joint, and potentially confer greater antero-posterior stability through the range of flexion than some other implant designs.

Aim

This study aims to compare the sagittal stability of four different total knee arthroplasty implant designs. Method

Comparison was made between four different implant designs: medial pivot (MP), two different types of cruciate retaining (CR1 and CR 2) and deep dish (DD). A cohort of 30 Medial Pivot (MP) knees were compared with matched patients from each of the other designs, 10 in each group. Patients were matched for age, body mass index and time to follow up.

Clinical examination was carried out by an orthopaedic surgeon blinded to implant type, and sagittal stability was tested using a KT1000 knee arthrometer, applying 67N of force at 30˚ and 90˚.

Results

The MP knee was more stable than the CR1 knee at both 30º (mean movement: 1.37mm vs 2.48mm, p=0.037) and 90º (1.68mm vs 2.37mm, p=0.030).

The MP knee was more stable than the CR2 knee at 30º (0.98mm vs1.33mm, p=0.013). The MP knee also demonstrated less movement at 90 º (0.98mm vs 1.33mm), but this was not statistically significant (p=0.156).

The MP knee was more stable than the DD knee at 30 º (0.48mm vs 1.33mm, p=0.03) and 90 º (0.67mm vs 1.15mm, p=0.048).

Overall the medial pivot design was more stable than all non-medial pivot designs at 30 º (0.8mm vs1.66mm, p=0.003) and 90 º (1.1mm vs 1.61mm, p= 0.008).

Conclusion

Overall, the medial pivot design demonstrated significantly greater antero-posterior stability than all other design types included in this study. Correlation with patient reported outcome scales will allow insight into whether these statistically significant differences are also clinically significant.