Biomechanical analysis on total knee replacement patients during gait: Medial pivot or posterior stabilized design?

Abstract

BackgroundTotal Knee Replacement surgery restores joint function in patients with advanced osteoarthritis. There are several prostheses available based on different mechanisms, which guarantee knee stability during Activities of Daily Living. The aim of this study is to compare ball-in-socket (or Medial Pivot) and post-cam mechanisms to detect possible differences in terms of biomechanical parameters between these two prosthesis designs and to evaluate which design is closer to physiological biomechanics. MethodsA kinematics, kinetics and electromyography lower limb analyses were performed during gait on sixty subjects: twenty with Medial Pivot prosthesis, twenty with posterior stabilized prosthesis and twenty healthy subjects to obtain a physiologic reference. FindingsTotal Knee Replacement gait pattern for both patient groups were characterized by reduced walking speed, reduced stride length and increased stance time respect to control group. Comparison between Medial Pivot and Posterior Stabilized groups showed a reduction of knee flexion and flexor moment in patients with ball-in-socket mechanism. A prolonged muscular activity of rectus femoris was observed in Medial Pivot patients compared to Posterior Stabilized and control groups. Interpretation“Stiff knee pattern” mechanism was showed for both patient groups but more enhanced in Medial Pivot patients. Even though the Posterior Stabilized design introduces the non-physiological paradoxical motion and the Medial Pivot design seems to better reproduce the physiological condylar movement as gait analysis parameters, including kinematics, kinetics and electromyographic parameters were closer to control group and, in turn, to physiological gait for the Posterior Stabilized than Medial Pivot group parameters.