Citation

Chevalier A, Vermue H, Pringels L, Herregodts S, Duquesne K, Victor J, Loccufier M. Bone Joint Res. 2023; 12(4): 285-293.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2023, British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery)

DOI

10.1302/2046-3758.124.BJR-2022-0298.R2

PMID

37067369

PMCID

PMC10108725

Abstract

The goal was to evaluate tibiofemoral knee joint kinematics during stair descent, by simulating the full stair descent motion in vitro. The knee joint kinematics were evaluated for two types of knee implants: bi-cruciate retaining and bi-cruciate stabilized. It was hypothesized that the bi-cruciate retaining implant better approximates native kinematics. The in vitro study included 20 specimens which were tested during a full stair descent with physiological muscle forces in a dynamic knee rig. Laxity envelopes were measured by applying external loading conditions in varus/valgus and internal/external direction. The laxity results show that both implants are capable of mimicking the native internal/external-laxity during the controlled lowering phase. The kinematic results show that the bi-cruciate retaining implant tends to approximate the native condition better compared to bi-cruciate stabilized implant. This is valid for the internal/external rotation and the anteroposterior translation during all phases of the stair descent, and for the compression-distraction of the knee joint during swing and controlled lowering phase. The results show a better approximation of the native kinematics by the bi-cruciate retaining knee implant compared to the bi-cruciate stabilized knee implant for internal/external rotation and anteroposterior translation. Whether this will result in better patient outcomes remains to be investigated.

Language: en