Abstract
Introduction
Total knee replacement (TKR) is an established and effective surgical procedure in case of advanced osteoarthritis. However, the rate of satisfied patients amounts only to about 75 %. One common cause for unsatisfied patients is the anterior knee pain, which is partially caused by an increase in patellofemoral contact force and abnormal patellar kinematics. Since the malpositioning of the tibial and the femoral component affects the interplay in the patellofemoral joint and therefore contributes to anterior knee pain, we conducted a computational study on a cruciate-retaining (CR) TKR and analysed the effect of isolated femoral and tibial component malalignments on patellofemoral dynamics during a squat motion.
Methods
To analyse different implant configurations, a musculoskeletal multibody model was implemented in the software Simpack V9.7 (Simpack AG, Gilching, Germany) from the SimTK data set (Fregly et al.). The musculoskeletal model comprised relevant ligaments with nonlinear force-strain relation according to Wismans and Hill-type muscles spanning the lower extremity. The experimental data were obtained from one male subject, who received an instrumented CR TKR. Muscle forces were calculated using a variant of the computed muscle control algorithm. To enable roll-glide kinematics, both tibio- and patellofemoral joint compartments were modelled with six degrees of freedom by implementing a polygon-contact-model representing the detailed implant surfaces. Tibiofemoral contact forces were predicted and validated using data from experimental squat trials (SimTK). The validated simulation model has been used as reference configuration corresponding to the optimal surgical technique. In the following, implant configurations, i.e. numerous combinations of relative femoral and tibial component alignment were analysed: malposition of the femoral/tibial component in mediolateral (±3 mm) and anterior-posterior (±3 mm) direction.
Results
Mediolateral translation/malposition of the tibial component did not show high influence on the maximal patellofemoral contact force. Regarding the mediolateral translation of the femoral component, similar tendencies were observed. However, lateralisation of the femoral component (3 mm) clearly increased the lateral patella shift and medialisation of the tibial component (3 mm) led to a slightly increased lateral patella shift.
Compared to the reference model, pronounced posterior translation of the tibial and femoral component resulted in a lower patellofemoral contact force, further increasing with higher anterior translation of the components. The translation of the tibial component showed smaller influence on the patellofemoral contact force than the translation of the femoral component.
Discussion
In our present study, the mediolateral malposition of the femoral and tibial component showed no major impact on patellofemoral contact force and contribution to anterior knee pain in patients with CR TKR. However, the influence of implant component positioning in anterior-posterior direction on patellofemoral contact force is evident, especially for the femoral component. Our generated musculoskeletal model can contribute to computer-assisted preclinical testing of TKR and may support clinical decision-making in preoperative planning.
