Patient-specific musculoskeletal models as a framework for comparing ACL function in unicompartmental versus bicruciate retaining arthroplasty.

Abstract

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty has been shown to provide superior functional outcomes compared to total knee arthroplasty and have motivated development of advanced implant designs including bicruciate retaining knee arthroplasty. However, few validated frameworks are available to directly compare the effect of implant design and surgical techniques on ligament function and joint kinematics. In the present study, the subject-specific lower extremity models were developed based on musculoskeletal modeling framework using force-dependent kinematics method, and validated against in vivo telemetric data. The experiment data of two subjects who underwent TKA were obtained from the SimTK "Grand Challenge Competition" repository, and integrated into the subject-specific lower extremity model. Five walking gait trials and three different knee implant models for each subject were used as partial inputs for the model to predict knee biomechanics for unicompartmental, bicruciate retaining, and total knee arthroplasty. The results showed no significant differences in the tibiofemoral contact forces or angular kinematic parameters between three groups. However, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty demonstrated significantly more posterior tibial location between 0% and 40% of the gait cycle (p < 0.017). Significant differences in range of tibiofemoral anterior/posterior translation and medial/lateral translation were also observed between unicompartmental and bicruciate retaining arthroplasty (p < 0.017). Peak values of anterior cruciate ligament forces differed between unicompartmental and bicruciate retaining arthroplasty from 10% to 30% of the gait cycle. Findings of this study indicate that unicompartmental and bicruciate retaining arthroplasty do not have identical biomechanics and point to the complementary role of anterior cruciate ligament and articular geometry in guiding knee function. Further, the patient-specific musculoskeletal model developed provides a reliable framework for assessing new implant designs, and effect of surgical techniques on knee biomechanics following arthroplasty.