Tibiofemoral contact behavior is improved in high-flexion cruciate retaining TKA

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

Volumn 452, Issue , 2006, Pages 59-64

  Most, Ephrat ^a,b,c   Sultan, Peter G ^a   Park, Sang Eun ^a   Papannagari, Ramprasad ^a   Li, Guoan ^a,d  

^a HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge   (United States)

^c SterlingTech Software Inc   (United States)

^d MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMECHANICS; CLINICAL FEATURE; CONFERENCE PAPER; FEMUR; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; KINEMATICS; KNEE FUNCTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANGE OF MOTION; SURFACE PROPERTY; TIBIA; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT; AGED; ARTICLE; CADAVER; FEMALE; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; KNEE; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; PROSTHESIS;

AGED; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; CADAVER; FEMALE; FEMUR; HUMANS; KNEE JOINT; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MALE; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; TIBIA;

EID: 33750626540     PISSN: 0009921X     EISSN: 15281132     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000238843.11176.42     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (24)

1. Anouchi YS, McShane M, Kelly F Jr, Elting J, Stiehl J. Range of motion in total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;331:87-92.
2. Argenson JN, Scuderi GR, Komistek RD, Scott WN, Kelly MA, Aubaniac JM. In vivo kinematic evaluation and design considerations related to high flexion in total knee arthroplasty. J Biomech. 2005;38:277-284.
3. Bellemans J, Banks S, Victor J, Vandenneucker H, Moemans A. Fluoroscopic analysis of the kinematics of deep flexion in total knee arthroplasty: influence of posterior condylar offset. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002;84:50-53.
4. Bertin KC, Komistek RD, Dennis DA, Hoff WA, Anderson DT, Langer T. In vivo determination of posterior femoral rollback for subjects having a NexGen posterior cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17:1040-1048.
5. Bristol R, Fitzpatrick D, Brown T, Callaghan J. Non-uniformity of contact stress on polyethylene inserts in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1996;11:75-80.
6. Dennis D, Komistek R, Colwell C, Ranawat C, Scott R, Thornhill T, Lapp M. In-vivo anteroposterior femorotibial translation of total knee arthroplasty: a multicenter analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;356:47-57.
7. Dennis D, Komistek R, Stiehl J, Walker S, Dennis K. Range of motion after total knee arthroplasty: the effect of implant design and weight-bearing conditions. J Arthroplasty. 1998;13:748-752.
8. Dennis DA, Komistek RD, Mahfouz MR. In vivo fluoroscopic analysis of fixed-bearing total knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;410:114-130.
9. Hefzy MS, Kelly BP, Cooke TD. Kinematics of the knee joint in deep flexion: a radiographic assessment. Med Eng Phys. 1998;20:302-307.
10. Komistek RD, Scott RD, Dennis DA, Yasgur D, Anderson DT, Hajner ME. In vivo comparison of femorotibial contact positions for press-fit posterior stabilized and posterior cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17:209-216.
11. Li G, Most E, Otterberg E, Sabbag K, Zayontz S, Johnson T, Rubash H. Biomechanics of posterior-substituting total knee arthroplasty: an in vitro study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;404:214-225.
12. Li G, Most E, Sultan PG, Schule S, Zayontz S, Park SE, Rubash HE. Knee kinematics with a high-flexion posterior stabilized total knee prosthesis: an in vitro robotic experimental investigation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:1721-1729.
13. Li G, Schule SL, Zayontz S, Maloney WJ, Rubash HE. Improving flexion in total knee arthroplasty. In Callaghan J, Rosenberg AG, Rubash HE, Simonian PT, Wickiewicz TA (eds). The adult knee. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2003:1233-1244.
14. Li G, Zayontz S, Most E, Otterberg E, Sabbag K, Rubash HE. Cruciate-retaining and cruciate-substituting total knee arthroplasty: an in vitro comparison of the kinematics under muscle loads. J Arthroplasty. 2001;16:150-156.
15. Most E, Li G, Sultan PG, Park SE, Rubash HE. Kinematic analysis of conventional and high-flexion cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasties: an in vitro investigation. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:529-535.
16. Most E, Zayontz S, Li G, Otterberg E, Sabbag K, Rubash HE. Femoral rollback after cruciate-retaining and stabilizing total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;410:101-113.
17. Mulholland S, Wyss U. Activities of daily living in non-Western cultures: range of motion requirements for hip and knee joint implants. Int J Rehab Res. 2001;24:191-198.
18. Ranawat CS, Luessenhop CP, Rodriguez JA. The press-fit condylar modular total knee system: four-to-six-year results with a posterior-cruciate- substituting design. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997;79:342-348.
19. Rostoker W, Galante JO. Contact pressure dependence of wear rates of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene. J Biomed Mater Res. 1979;13:957-964.
20. Rowe P, Myles C, Walker C, Nutton R. Knee joint kinematics in gait and other functinal activities measured using flexible electrogoniometry: how much knee motion is sufficient for normal daily life? Gait Posture. 2000;12:143-155.
21. Sathasivam S, Walker PS, Campbell PA, Rayner K. The effect of contact area on wear in relation to fixed bearing and mobile bearing knee replacements. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001;58:282-290.
22. Sultan PG, Most E, Schule S, Li G, Rubash HE. Optimizing flexion after total knee arthroplasty: advances in prosthetic design. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;416:167-173.
23. Walker P, Garg A. Range of motion in total knee arthroplasty: a computer analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;262:227-235.
24. Weiss JM, Noble PC, Conditt MA, Kohl HW, Roberts S, Cook KF, Gordon MJ, Mathis KB. What functional activities are important to patients with knee replacements? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;404:172-188.