The German Arthroplasty registry (EPRD) has shown that different prosthesis systems have different rates of secondary patellar resurfacing: four years after implantation, the posterior-stabilized (PS) Vega prosthesis has a 3.2% risk of secondary patellar resurfacing compared to the cruciate-retaining (CR) Columbus prosthesis at 1.0% (both Aesculap AG, Tuttlingen, Germany). We hypothesized that PS implants have increased retropatellar pressure and a decreased retropatellar contact area compared to a CR design, which may lead to an increased likelihood of secondary patellar resurfacing. Eight fresh frozen specimens (cohort 1) were tested with an established knee rig. In addition, a possible influence of the registry-based patient collective (cohort 2) was investigated. No significant differences were found in patient data-cohort 2-(sex, age). A generally lower number of PS system cases is noteworthy. No significant increased patella pressure could be detected with the PS design, but a lower contact area was observed (cohort 1). Lower quadriceps force (100°-130° flexion), increased anterior movement of the tibia (rollback), greater external tilt of the patella, and increasing facet pressure in the Vega PS design indicate a multifactorial cause for a higher rate of secondary resurfacing which was found in the EPRD patient cohort and might be related to the PS' principle function.
Secondary Patellar Resurfacing in TKA: A Combined Analysis of Registry Data and Biomechanical Testing.
阅读:3
作者:Bauer Leandra, Woiczinski Matthias, Thorwächter Christoph, Melsheimer Oliver, Weber Patrick, Grupp Thomas M, Jansson Volkmar, Steinbrück Arnd
| 期刊: | Journal of Clinical Medicine | 影响因子: | 2.900 |
| 时间: | 2021 | 起止号: | 2021 Mar 16; 10(6):1227 |
| doi: | 10.3390/jcm10061227 | ||
特别声明
1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。
2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。
3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。
4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。
