This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Further opinion Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal My Folders Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (9) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Victor, J. Articles by Bellemans, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Victor, J. Articles by Bellemans, J.

Kinematics of posterior cruciate ligament-retaining and -substituting total knee arthroplasty

A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMISED OUTCOME STUDY

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, A. Z. St-Lucas, St Lucaslaan 29, 8310 Brugge, Belgium, The University of Florida, Mail Stop 116250, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, U. Z. Pellenberg, Weligerveld 1, 3212 Lubbeek, Belgium.

Correspondence should be sent to Dr J. Victor; e-mail: j.victor{at}skynet.be

We performed a prospective, randomised trial of 44 patients to compare the functional outcomes of a posterior-cruciate-ligament-retaining and posterior-cruciate-ligament-substituting total knee arthroplasty, and to gain a better understanding of the in vivo kinematic behaviour of both devices.

At follow-up at five years, no statistically significant differences were found in the clinical outcome measurements for either design. The prevalence of radiolucent lines and the survivorship were the same. In a subgroup of 15 knees, additional image-intensifier analysis in the horizontal and sagittal planes was performed during step-up and lunge activity. Our analysis revealed striking differences. Lunge activity showed a mean posterior displacement of both medial and lateral tibiofemoral contact areas (roll-back) which was greater and more consistent in the cruciate-substituting than in the cruciate-retaining group (medial p < 0.0001, lateral p = 0.011). The amount of posterior displacement could predict the maximum flexion which could be achieved (p = 0.018). Forward displacement of the tibiofemoral contact area in flexion during stair activity was seen more in the cruciate-retaining than in the cruciate-substituting group. This was attributed mainly to insufficiency of the posterior cruciate ligament and partially to that of the anterior cruciate ligament. We concluded that, despite similar clinical outcomes, there are significant kinematic differences between cruciate-retaining and cruciate-substituting arthroplasties.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. Christen, P. V. Heesterbeek, A. Wymenga, and U. Wehrli Posterior cruciate ligament balancing in total knee replacement: THE QUANTITATIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TIGHTNESS OF THE FLEXION GAP AND TIBIAL TRANSLATION J Bone Joint Surg Br, August 1, 2007; 89-B(8): 1046 - 1050. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. J. Shannon, J. J. Cronin, M. S. Cleary, S. J. Eustace, and J. M. O'Byrne The posterior cruciate ligament-preserving total knee replacement: do we 'preserve' it?: A RADIOLOGICAL STUDY J Bone Joint Surg Br, June 1, 2007; 89-B(6): 766 - 771. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. P. Delport, S. A. Banks, J. De Schepper, and J. Bellemans A kinematic comparison of fixed- and mobile-bearing knee replacements J Bone Joint Surg Br, August 1, 2006; 88-B(8): 1016 - 1021. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]