...
首页> 外文期刊>Asia-Pacific Journal of Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Rehabilitation and Technology >Comparison of in?vivo kinematics of total knee arthroplasty between cruciate retaining and cruciate substituting insert
【24h】

Comparison of in?vivo kinematics of total knee arthroplasty between cruciate retaining and cruciate substituting insert

机译:在十字形保留和十字架替代刀片之间的膝关节间关节置换术的体内运动学的比较

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BackgroundThe decision to choose cruciate retaining (CR) insert or cruciate substituting (CS) insert during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains a controversial issue. We hypothesized that there are different knee kinematics between CR and CS inserts and that a raised anterior lip design would offer a potential minimization of the paradoxical movement and provide joint stability. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare kinematics of a CR and CS TKA of the same single-radius design.MethodsWe investigated the in?vivo knee kinematics of 20 knees with a CR TKA (10 knees in the CR insert and 10 knees in the CS insert). Patients were examined during deep knee flexion using fluoroscopy and femorotibial motion was determined using a 2- to 3-dimensional registration technique, which used computer-assisted design models to reproduce the spatial positions of the femoral and tibial components. We evaluated the knee range of motion (ROM), femoral axial rotation relative to the tibial component, anteroposterior translation, and kinematic pathway of the nearest point of the medial and lateral femoral condyles on the tibial tray.ResultsThe average ROM was 121.0?±?17.3° in CR and 110.8?±?12.4° in CS. The amount of femoral axial rotation was 7.2?±?3.9° in CR, and 7.4?±?2.7° in CS. No significant difference was observed in the amount of anterior translation between CR and CS. The CR and CS inserts had a similar kinematic pattern up to 100° flexion that was central pivot up to 70° flexion and then paradoxical anterior femoral movement until 100° flexion.ConclusionThe present study demonstrated that there was no significant difference between the inserts in knee kinematics. These kinematic results suggested that the increased anterior lip could not control anterior movement in the CS insert.
机译:背景技术在总膝关节形成术(TKA)期间,选择十字架保留(CR)插入(CR)插入或十字架替代(CS)插入物仍然是一个有争议的问题。我们假设CR和CS插入物之间存在不同的膝关节运动学,并且凸起的前唇设计将提供矛盾运动的潜在最小化,并提供联合稳定性。本研究的目的是评估和比较同一单半径设计的CR和CS TKA的运动学。一致的膝盖膝关节运动学20个膝关节用CR TKA(Cr插入刀片10个膝盖和10个膝盖在CS插入中)。使用荧光透视弯曲期间检查患者,使用2至三维登记技术确定雌性运动,该方法使用计算机辅助设计模型来再现股骨和胫骨部件的空间位置。我们评估了相对于胫骨部件,前后翻译的股骨轴向旋转的膝关节(ROM),股骨头转换和胫骨上的侧向股骨髁的运动途径。普通ROM为121.0?±±±在Cr和110.8中的17.3°±12.4°IN CS中。股骨轴向旋转量为7.2?±3.9°在Cs中,7.4°?2.7°。在Cr和Cs之间的前平移量中没有观察到显着差异。 CR和CS插入件具有相似的运动模式,高达100°的屈曲,中央枢转高达70°屈曲,然后矛盾的前型股骨移动直到100°屈曲。结论本研究表明膝关节中的插入物之间没有显着差异运动学。这些运动效果表明,增加的前唇缘无法控制CS插入中的前移动。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号