No abstract

We have examined the relationship between the size of the flexion gap and the anterior translation of the tibia in flexion during implantation of a posterior cruciate ligament (PCL)-retaining BalanSys total knee replacement (TKR). In 91 knees, the flexion gap and anterior tibial translation were measured intra-operatively using a custom-made, flexible tensor-spacer device. The results showed that for each increase of 1 mm in the flexion gap in the tensed knee a mean anterior tibial translation of 1.25 mm (SD 0.79, 95% confidence interval 1.13 to 1.37) was produced. When implanting a PCL-retaining TKR the surgeon should be aware that the tibiofemoral contact point is related to the choice of thickness of the polyethylene insert. An additional thickness of polyethylene insert of 2 mm results in an approximate increase in tibial anterior translation of 2.5 mm while the flexed knee is distracted with a force of between 100 N and 200 N.

PurposeThe primary goal of this study was to assess the difference in active flexion between patients with a mobile versus a fixed bearing, cruciate retaining, and total knee arthroplasty. The study was designed as a randomised controlled multi-centre trial.MethodsParticipants were assigned to interventions by using block-stratified, random allocation. Outcome parameters were active flexion, passive flexion, and Knee Society Score (KSS). Outcome parameters were assessed preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively by an independent nurse.ResultsNinety-two patients from one centre were included, 46 in each group. Active flexion was comparable for the two groups, 99.9° for the mobile bearing group and 101° for the fixed bearing group with a baseline controlled difference of 1.0 (95% CI −3.9 to 5.8, n.s.). The Clinical KSS was comparable between the two bearing groups (Mobile 90.0 vs. fixed 92.4, n.s.). The functional KSS showed a difference that was attributable to the stair climbing subscore, which showed a difference in favour of the fixed bearing design between preoperative and 3 months (7.3 point difference; 95% CI 2.3–12.5; P = 0.005) as well as 12 months (4.8 point difference; 95% CI 0.1–9.6; P = 0.045).ConclusionsThere were no short-term differences in active flexion between fixed bearing and mobile bearing total knee arthroplasty.Level of evidenceI.

BackgroundThe Journey bicruciate substituting (BCS) total knee replacement (TKR) is intended to improve knee kinematics by more closely approximating the surfaces of a normal knee. The purpose of this analysis was to address the safety of Journey BCS knees by studying early complication and revision rates in a consecutive case series.MethodsBetween December 2006 and May 2011, a single surgeon implanted 226 Journey BCS total knee prostheses in 191 patients (124 women, 67 men) who were eligible for study. Mean age at surgery was 68 years (41–85 years).Outcome measures were early complications and minor and major revision rates. All complications were considered, irrespective of whether conservative treatment or revision was required.ResultsThe average implantation time was 3.5 years (range 1.3-5.8 years). Thirty-three complications (14.6% of 226 knees) required minor or major revision surgery in 25 patients. The remaining eight patients were treated conservatively. Sixteen minor revisions were performed in 12 patients. Thirteen major revisions were required in 13 patients, which results in a rate of 1.65 major revisions per 100 component years. The linear trend of the early complication rate by treatment year was not significant (p = .22).Multivariate logistic regression showed no significant predictors for the occurrence of a complication or for revision surgery. A tendency towards higher complication rates was observed in female patients, although it was not significant (p = .066).ConclusionsThe complication and revision rates of the Journey BCS knee implant are high in comparison with those reported for other established total knee systems. Caution is advised when using this implant, particularly for less experienced knee surgeons.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2474-15-395) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.