The Impact of “High-Risk” Sports in Knee Replacement Patients

At the recent meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, a study was presented where survivorship of total knee replacements in patients who participated in certain “high-risk” sports was compared to those who did not participate in such activities.1

In this study, a group of 1500 patients that received the identical prosthesis were asked if they participated in certain high-risk activities. These are activities which place excessive load on the implant such as basketball, soccer or football. Within this group, 218 were identified as having participated in such “high-risk” sports. These patients were then “matched” against a control group so other factors such as BMI, age and sex could be eliminated.

What the researchers discovered was somewhat contrary to conventional wisdom. At roughly 7.5 years after surgery, the high-risk group had slightly superior function and slightly lower rates of failure (loosening, wear of the implant etc) compared to the control group. As stated in the study, “At a mean follow-up time of 7.5 years after modern condylar TKA in 218 patients no significant differences in implant durability could be demonstrated between those involved in not-recommended sports activities compared to matched controls.” Only time will tell if differences in implant longevity over longer periods will become apparent, so further study is warranted. Nonetheless, as increasingly younger and more active patients elect to have total knee replacement surgery, the limits on total knee replacement design and longevity will be tested and questioned.

References
1 Parratte S, Lynn Dahm DL, Stuart MJ, Pagnano MW, Berry DJ, Does Participation in Not-recommended Sports Impact Total Knee Arthroplasty Durability, AAOS Annual Meeting Podium Presentation, 2010

Posted by | Filed Under What's New? | Leave a Comment 

How Are the Ligaments Affected in Total Knee Replacement?

A common question regarding (also known as total knee arthroplasty) is what happens to the ligaments in the knee as a result of knee replacement?

First, it is helpful to understand the location and function of these important soft-tissue structures.  There are four major ligaments in the knee joint.  Two of these ligaments act as “side-to-side” stabilizers in the knee:  the medial collateral ligament (MCL) and the lateral collateral ligament (LCL).  These ligaments connect the femur (thigh-bone) to the tibia (shin-bone).  They are located on the inside (medial) and outside (lateral) parts of the knee.

The other two ligaments, the anterior cruciate ligament and the posterior cruciate ligament (ACL and PCL) limit “front-to-back” or anterior-to-posterior movement of the knee.  These ligaments are named based on their attachment site on the tibia and are found roughly in the middle of the joint.  The PCL runs from the back or posterior part of the tibia to the front of the femur.  The ACL runs in the opposite way.  These ligament cross, hence the name “cruciate”.

So what happens to these ligaments as a result of total knee replacement?   The collateral ligaments (ACL and MCL) are left intact as they are important for proper function and longevity of a total knee replacement since the function of these ligaments is, for the most part, not replaced by the prosthetic components.

The ACL is removed since the portions of the bone where it typically attaches are removed and replaced by the implant components.  Often this structure is severly compromised in patients requiring total knee replacement.

What is done with the PCL is not as straightforward.  Depending on the particular patient as well as surgeon preference, the PCL may either be retained or sacrificed. Implants specific to either scenario are available for the surgeon’s use.

For more on types of implants see our section on this topic.

So in summary, in a standard total knee replacement..

  • The collateral ligaments (LCL and MCL) are preserved
  • The ACL is removed
  • The PCL is either retained or sacrificed.

Posted by | Filed Under What's New? | Leave a Comment 

Patellar Clunk Syndrome: Complication Following Knee Replacement Surgery

In general, (TKR) is a highly successful procedure. However, complications, although relatively rare, can sometimes occur. One such complication is known as .

To understand this condition, it helps to first understand a little bit about knee anatomy and function (Figure 1). During knee flexion and extension, the patella (knee-cap) rides within a groove in the femur (thigh bone).

Knee Anatomy

Figure 1: Basic Knee Anatomy

In knee replacement the worn ends of the bones are “resurfaced” with metal and plastic implants. The patellar groove is part of the metal femoral component that is implanted onto the prepared femur during the total knee replacement procedure. At the end of this groove there is a transition between the metallic implant and the native bony surface.

Following knee replacement, scar tissue can sometimes form at the top or “superior pole” of the patella. During particularly deep flexion, this scar tissue may move below the end of the groove in the femoral component and then “catch” on the end of the groove as the patella moves back with knee extension. It is this catching and then forceful release with extension that results in the “clunk” and pain characteristic of this condition.

This condition is more prevalent in a type of knee replacement known as Posterior Stabilized, or “PS” knee replacement, although it has also been reported in Cruciate Retaining (CR) knee designs as well. 1 In PS knee designs, where the posterior cruciate ligament is removed, the patellar groove tends to be shorter to avoid contact (in extension) between the end of the groove and a plastic post on the tibial component found in these types of designs. Consequently, the patella can come off the end of the groove during lesser degrees of flexion.

The publication cited at the end of this article provides more detailed information and a review of some of the literature on patellar clunk.

1 Niikura T, Tsumura N, Tsujimoto K, Yoshiya S, Jurosaka M, Shiba R. Patellar Clunk Syndrome After TKA with Cruciate Retaining Design: A Report of Two Cases. Orthopedics. 2008: 31:90

Posted by | Filed Under What's New? | 7 Comments 

Is Knee Replacement in Your Future?

Most knee replacements are performed for the treatment of where the smooth cartilage in the knee joint breaks down resulting in pain, stiffness and swelling. The x-ray below is of a knee where osteoarthritis is present.  Note the close proximity of the upper (femur) and lower (tibia) bones.  In this knee the cartilage, which is not visible on an x-ray has worn away.  If this had been a healthy knee, there would be a distinct gap between the two bones.

intro-re-write-21-jan-09_html_2834b341

Osteoarthritis is usually progressive.  It often begins mildly, but over time, wear in the cartilage starts to result in an uneven distribution of weight across the knee joint; often with more damage observed on one side versus the other.  This in turn causes even more force to pass through the affected side, resulting in even faster degeneration of the joint.

This localized damage is most commonly found on the inside or “medial” part of the knee (), but it can also occur on the “lateral” or outside part of the knee (lateral compartment).  When it occurs on the medial side, the patient may have a varus or “bow-legged” deformity.  When lateral osteoarthritis is present, a distinct “knock-kneed” or valgus deformity is observed.

These deformities are usually corrected at the time of .

It is interesting to consider what, if anything, may initiate this cycle of uneven wear, worsening load distribution, and further wear.  Is it possible that some folks may be predisposed to this condition due to their bony anatomy?  A presentation at this years AAOS meeting looked to answer this very question. 1 The researchers examined the anatomy in patients receiving knee replacements whose pre-operative varus and valgus deformities were significant.  In those patients, they found that key functional axes in the knee were not aligned normally.  Specifically, they found that the alignment of the “mechanical axis” of the lower limb to the in the knee was not normal. To understand these axes and their observed relationship, a review of basic knee anatomy is required.

In the normal lower limb, the mechanical axis is defined as an imaginary line originating at the center of the femoral head (the “ball” on the “ball-and-socket hip joint) passing through the center of the knee and ending at the center of the ankle.  When the hip, knee and ankle line up in this way, the lower limb and knee joint alignment are considered “normal”.  In a varus or valgus knee, the center of the knee is no longer on this line and is pushed “outward” in varus and “inward”  in valgus.

The epicondylar axis is an imaginary line connecting the femoral (thigh-bone) origins of the medial collateral and lateral collateral ligaments (MCL and LCL).  One can think of these ligaments as the “ropes” or “chains holding a swing.  In this analogy, the epicondylar axis is like the top bar of the swing.  The tibia or thigh bone is the swing which rotates about the bar (epicondylar axis) during knee flexion and extension.

is-knee-replacement-in-your-future-23-mar-09_html_m53f606bc

In their study, the authors observed that in patients with severe varus or valgus deformities, the epicondylar axis was “misaligned” relative to the mechanical axis in the same direction (albeit smaller in magnitude) as in the knee joint deformity.  For example, if a patient had severe osteoarthritis in the medial or inside part of the knee, a significant bow-legged or varus deformity was observed and the epicondylar axis was “tilted” in the same direction.  In other words, the inherent bony anatomy appeared to predispose certain patients to uneven loading across the knee joint (a “crooked swing”), which, in turn appears to have made them more susceptible to the resulting osteoarthritic deformity.  The results were not statistically significant, but a noticeable trend was observed.  So to answer the question “is knee replacement in your future?” one may not have to look much further than one’s own bony anatomy.

1. Beyers-Thering MT, Krackow KA, Mihalko WM. “Relationship of the Femoral Epicondylar Axis to the Mechanical Axis in Deformed Osteoarthritic Knees.” 2009 AAOS Annual Meeting, Poster No. P201

Posted by | Filed Under What's New? | 2 Comments 

Is One Really Better? Fixed vs. Mobile Bearing Knee Replacement

In our recent post “What’s the ‘Best’ Total Knee Replacement?” it was suggested that more often than not, it “may simply be the one which your experienced surgeon has chosen to utilize”. This sentiment was echoed in a recent publication. 1

In the January 2007 Journal of Orthopedic Surgery and Research article, the authors reviewed two major types of total knee replacements: fixed bearing and mobile bearing designs. The theoretical advantages of the mobile bearing design are discussed and the review is broken down into two main sections, a “Biomechanical Review” and a “Clinical Review” where the results of the two types of designs are compared. (See our section on Mobile Bearing Knee Replacement Here, for a brief description of this type of implant).

In the “Biomechanical Review”, laboratory testing of relative wear rates of the plastic components in each type of design is discussed. Also, studies of knee motion comparing mobile and fixed bearings implanted in both cadaver experiments and in actual patients are summarized. Here, the mobile bearing design seems to have less wear and more natural motion.

In the “Clinical Review”, the results of some earlier clinical studies are examined. In these studies, increased wear rate and subsequent osteolysis (see our section on Implant Wear) in the mobile bearing design was observed. At first, this seems to contradict the previously discussed lab studies on wear (where the mobile bearing was superior). However, as the article goes on to explain the increased wear and osteolysis can be attributed to the presence of the additional wear surface on the underside of the mobile bearing as well as to size of the wear particles. Mobile bearings tend to produce smaller particles which actually result in a greater biologic response and osteolysis. Also, the possibility of tibial insert dislocation or “spinout” in mobile bearings is discussed and some observed cases of insert dislocation are shown.

So at this point in the article, the advantage of one type of design over the other is not very clear. The “Clinical Review” continues on with a review of long term clinical results. Unfortunately, that section concludes with the statement: “So far, the theoretical advantages for mobile bearing design to provide long-term durability have not been demonstrated by any outcome study.” Long term performance simply does not help in differentiating the two designs, with both performing similarly. At the end of the day, the study concludes, (as suggested in the previous post) “For the experienced surgeon, one familiar surgical protocol and instrumentation is suggested rather than implant design, either in fixed bearing or mobile bearing.”

1. Huang CH, Liau JJ, Cheng CK: Fixed or Mobile-bearing Total Knee Arthroplasty. J of Ortho Surg and Res 2007, 2:1

Posted by | Filed Under What's New? | Leave a Comment 

Total Knee Replacement

, which is also known as Total Knee Arthroplasty, is a surgical procedure where:

  • The worn ends of the bones which make up the knee joint are resurfaced with metal and plastic implants
  • The alignment of the bones of the knee is restored so that the weight which passes through the knee is normally distributed.

Further Reading on Total Knee Replacement:

Knee Replacement Surgery Overview

Knee Replacement Complications

Minimally Invasive Knee Replacement

Computer Assisted Knee Replacement

Posted by | Filed Under Uncategorized | Leave a Comment