No differences in knee kinematics between active and passive flexion-extension movement: an intra-operative kinematic analysis performed during total knee arthroplasty.
Active and passive flexion
Kinematics
Navigation system
Total knee Arthroplasty
Total knee replacement
Journal
Journal of experimental orthopaedics
ISSN: 2197-1153
Titre abrégé: J Exp Orthop
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101653750
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Mar 2020
12 Mar 2020
Historique:
received:
06
01
2020
accepted:
27
02
2020
entrez:
14
3
2020
pubmed:
14
3
2020
medline:
14
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The objective of the present study was to acquire and compare by the use of a navigation system the intra-operative flexion-extension movement of the knee performed actively by the patient and passively by the surgeon before and after a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) implantation. A cohort of 31 patients with primary knee osteoarthritis (OA), candidate for TKA underwent intra-operative kinematics assessment with a commercial navigation system before and after the definitive implant positioning of a Cruciate Retaining (CR) Mobile Bearing (MB) prostheses. The kinematical data were acquired while surgeon performed the flexion-extension movement (passive ROM - pROM), and while the patient performed it (active ROM - aROM). Differences between pre- and post- implantation and between active and passive motions, were statistically analyzed using paired Student t-tests (p = 0.05). No statistically significant difference were found between aROM and pROM with paired Student t-test regarding internal-external rotation and anterior-posterior translation of the femoral component with respect to the tibia during flexion-extension movement before and after TKA implant (p > 0.05). Active muscle contraction seems to not significantly affect TKA kinematics. The ROM performed by the surgeon during operation resemble the movement actively performed by the patient. The clinical relevance of this study further supports the use of CAS system in performing intra-operative analysis concerning knee biomechanics.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32166475
doi: 10.1186/s40634-020-00229-7
pii: 10.1186/s40634-020-00229-7
pmc: PMC7067969
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
12Références
Int Orthop. 2011 Apr;35(4):515-20
pubmed: 20431881
J Orthop Res. 2009 Feb;27(2):202-7
pubmed: 18752279
J Arthroplasty. 2004 Dec;19(8):986-91
pubmed: 15586334
Open Biomed Eng J. 2008 Sep 10;2:52-6
pubmed: 19662117
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014 Dec;22(12):3113-20
pubmed: 25069569
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015 Jun;23(6):1622-30
pubmed: 24519618
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015 Jun;23(6):1741-7
pubmed: 25763851
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016 Jan;24(1):89-95
pubmed: 25261225
Knee. 2017 Dec;24(6):1462-1468
pubmed: 28970121
Anesthesiology. 1999 Aug;91(2):436-41
pubmed: 10443607
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016 Sep;24(9):3036-3043
pubmed: 25567541
J Biomech Eng. 1993 Nov;115(4A):344-9
pubmed: 8309227
Knee. 2010 Jan;17(1):38-42
pubmed: 19733084
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2019 Apr;29(3):675-681
pubmed: 30350020
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018 May;26(5):1465-1470
pubmed: 28093635
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019 Apr;27(4):1049-1056
pubmed: 30368560
Knee Surg Relat Res. 2016 Jun;28(2):118-29
pubmed: 27274468
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2006 Mar;21(3):279-87
pubmed: 16343713
J Biomech Eng. 1983 May;105(2):136-44
pubmed: 6865355
J Arthroplasty. 2015 Sep;30(9):1537-41
pubmed: 25896547