Effect of tibial prosthesis riser length on knee biomechanics after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

doi:10.12307/2024.086

Abstract

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty can effectively treat severe unilateral knee osteoarthritis. It has been found that posterior tibial cortical fracture is prone to occur after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. The fracture begins at the keel groove of tibial osteotomy. The tibial prosthesis riser length affects the biomechanical results of the knee joint after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of tibial prosthesis riser length on knee biomechanics in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, and to find out the relationship between prosthesis riser length and anterior and posterior tibial diameters of patients.
METHODS: Computed tomography image data and commonly used unicompartmental prostheses were selected from a 37-year-old healthy female with no history of knee disease. A natural knee joint model was established and a unicompartmental prosthesis model was built. Eight different lengths of tibial prosthesis risers were established, with a minimum length of 31 mm and a maximum length of 34.5 mm in 0.5 mm increments, for comparison with the commonly used hospital prosthesis riser length of 33.2 mm. The material of the femoral component and tibial disc was cobalt-chromium-molybdenum alloy, and the tibial spacer was ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene. The biomechanical changes of the knee joint were observed using finite element analysis software loaded with 1 000 N over the femur.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) The tibial stress was minimal at a tibial prosthesis riser length of 33 mm; the anterior cruciate ligament stress was minimal; the lateral meniscus stress was minimal, and the femoral prosthesis stress was minimal. The remaining components were less stressful. (2) The subject’s medial tibial plateau anterior-posterior diameter length was 53 mm, and by calculating the ratio, the optimal ratio of tibial prosthesis riser length to anterior-posterior tibial diameter should be about 62%. If it is lower than this value, aseptic loosening of the prosthesis may occur, and if it is higher than this value, fracture of the bone cortex at the anterior-posterior end of the tibia may occur.

Key words: unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, knee osteoarthritis, tibial prosthesis, riser length, finite element analysis

CLC Number:

Zhang Kai, Zhao Mingxin, Yang Yuzhu, Guo Yuan, Ji Binping. Effect of tibial prosthesis riser length on knee biomechanics after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2024, 28(21): 3281-3285.

Figures/Tables 7

References

[1] 涂意辉. 外侧单髁置换术:挑战与希望并存[J]. 中华外科杂志,2020,58(9):687-690.
[2] LUSTIG S, LORDING T, FRANK F, et al. Progression of medial osteoarthritis and long term results of lateral unicompartmental arthroplasty: 10 to 18 year follow-up of 54 consecutive implants. Knee. 2014;21 Suppl 1:S26-S32.
[3] MURRAY DW, GOODFELLOW JW, O’CONNOR JJ. The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(6):983-989.
[4] CHRISTENSEN NO. Unicompartmental prosthesis for gonarthrosis. A nine-year series of 575 knees from a Swedish hospital. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991; (273):165-169.
[5] GILL JR, CORBETT JA, WASTNEDGE E, et al. Forgotten Joint Score: Comparison between total and unicompartment knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2021;29:26-32.
[6] HALAWI MJ, BARSOUM WK. Unicompartment knee arthroplasty: Key concepts. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2017;8(1):11-13.
[7] PEERSMAN G, JAK W, VANDENLANGENBERGH T, et al. Cost-effectiveness of unicondylar versus total knee arthroplasty: a Markov model analysis. Knee. 2014; 21 Suppl 1:S37-S42.
[8] 贾笛, 李彦林, 杨龄坚, 等. 单髁置换术后膝关节内外侧间室应力变化有限元分析[J]. 中国运动医学杂志,2017,36(10):852-857.
[9] LASKIN RS. Unicompartmental tibiofemoral resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978;60(2):182-185.
[10] NEWMAN JH, ACKROYD CE, SHAH NA. Unicompartmental or total knee replacement? Five-year results of a prospective, randomised trial of 102 osteoarthritic knees with unicompartmental arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998; 80(5):862-865.
[11] TAYLOR M, BRYAN R, GALLOWAY F. Accounting for patient variability in finite element analysis of the intact and implanted hip and knee: a review. Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng. 2013;29(2):273-292.
[12] KANG KT, KWON OR, SON J, et al. Effect of joint line preservation on mobile-type bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: finite element analysis. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2018;41(1):201-208.
[13] 朱广铎. 单髁膝关节置换有限元分析[D].北京:北京协和医学院,2016.
[14] KANG KT, SON J, KWON SK, et al. Preservation of femoral and tibial coronal alignment to improve biomechanical effects of medial unicompartment knee arthroplasty: Computational study. Biomed Mater Eng. 2018;29(5):651-664.
[15] GALBUSERA F, FREUTEL M, DÜRSELEN L, et al. Material models and properties in the finite element analysis of knee ligaments: a literature review. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2014;2:54.
[16] ZHU GD, GUO WS, ZHANG QD, et al. Finite Element Analysis of Mobile-bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: The Influence of Tibial Component Coronal Alignment. Chin Med J (Engl). 2015;128(21):2873-2878.
[17] BAO HR, ZHU D, GONG H, et al. The effect of complete radial lateral meniscus posterior root tear on the knee contact mechanics: a finite element analysis. J Orthop Sci. 2013;18(2):256-263.
[18] RHO JY, HOBATHO MC, ASHMAN RB. Relations of mechanical properties to density and CT numbers in human bone. Med Eng Phys. 1995;17(5):347-355.
[19] 张国栋,廖维靖,陶圣祥,等. 股骨有限元分析赋材料属性的方法[J]. 中国组织工程研究与临床康复,2009,13(43): 8436-8441.
[20] 卢明峰,钟露斌,李泽晖,等. 牛津单髁置换术与全膝关节置换术治疗膝内侧单间室骨关节炎的近期疗效对比研究[J]. 中华骨与关节外科杂志,2016, 9(6):476-479,503.
[21] 胡懿郃,王贤,廖前德,等. 单髁膝关节置换治疗膝关节单间室病变[J]. 中国矫形外科杂志,2008,16(3):161-163.
[22] COSSEY AJ, SPRIGGINS AJ. The use of computer-assisted surgical navigation to prevent malalignment in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20(1):29-34.
[23] 崔文,杨抒,张小刚,等. 国内全膝关节置换磨损测试及数值模拟研究进展[J]. 中华骨科杂志,2021,41(7):459-470.
[24] KOH YG, PARK KM, KANG K, et al. Finite element analysis of the influence of the posterior tibial slope on mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2021;29:116-125.
[25] 坤能,赵改平,刘冬青,等.膝关节单髁置换术胫骨假体不同后倾角对假体磨损和功能的影响[J].医用生物力学,2021,36(4):618-624.
[26] PEGG EC, WALTER J, MELLON SJ, et al. Evaluation of factors affecting tibial bone strain after unicompartmental knee replacement. J Orthop Res. 2013;31(5):821-828.
[27] THOREAU L, MORCILLO MARFIL D, THIENPONT E. Correction to: Periprosthetic fractures after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a narrative review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2022;142(8):2049.
[28] 王煜东,汪利合,孙明帅,等.单髁置换术后假体周围骨折的危险因素及防治措施的研究进展[J].实用临床医药杂志,2022,26(14):144-148.
[29] HOUSKAMP DJ, TOMPANE T, BARLOW BT. What Is the Critical Tibial Resection Depth During Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty? A Biomechanical Study of Fracture Risk. J Arthroplasty. 2020;35(8):2244-2248.
[30] BURGER JA, JAGER T, DOOLEY MS, et al. Comparable incidence of periprosthetic tibial fractures in cementless and cemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2022;30(3):852-874.
[31] ALETO TJ, BEREND ME, RITTER MA, et al. Early failure of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty leading to revision. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23(2):159-163.
[32] MOHAMMAD HR, MATHARU GS, JUDGE A, et al. New surgical instrumentation reduces the revision rate of unicompartmental knee replacement: A propensity score matched comparison of 15,906 knees from the National Joint Registry. Knee. 2020;27(3):993-1002.
[33] HIRANAKA T, YOSHIKAWA R, YOSHIDA K, et al. Tibial shape and size predicts the risk of tibial plateau fracture after cementless unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in Japanese patients. Bone Joint J. 2020;102-B(7):861-867.
[34] SMALL SR, BEREND ME, RITTER MA, et al. Bearing mobility affects tibial strain in mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int. 2010; 19:185-190.
[35] PRICE AJ, SVARD U. A second decade lifetable survival analysis of the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(1):174-179.
[36] WALKER T, HETTO P, BRUCKNER T, et al. Minimally invasive Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty ensures excellent functional outcome and high survivorship in the long term. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019;27(5):1658-1664.
[37] PEGG EC, WALTER J, MELLON SJ, et al. Evaluation of factors affecting tibial bone strain after unicompartmental knee replacement. J Orthop Res. 2013;31(5):821-828.
[38] SEEGER JB, HAAS D, JÄGER S, et al. Extended sagittal saw cut significantly reduces fracture load in cementless unicompartmental knee arthroplasty compared to cemented tibia plateaus: an experimental cadaver study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20(6):1087-1091.