Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

The medial tibial joint line elevation over 5 mm restrained the improvement of knee extension angle in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between medial tibial joint line elevation and the improvement of range of motion (ROM) in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). The hypothesis was that limited elevation of tibial joint line will improve knee range of motion in UKA.

Methods

Forty-six consecutive medial UKAs were enrolled in this study. Medial tibial joint line elevation was defined as the polyethylene insert and tibial tray thickness minus the tibial osteotomy and sawblade thickness. Positive values indicated an elevation of the tibial joint line. A component gap between the femoral trial prosthesis and the medial tibial osteotomy surface was also examined. Joint loosening was also calculated based on the joint component gap minus insert and tibial tray thickness. The correlation of the medial tibial joint line elevation with joint looseness and postoperative range of motion were analyzed.

Results

The mean medial tibial joint line elevation was 4.9 ± 1.1 mm. The medial tibial joint line elevation reduced the improvement of knee extension (R = − 0.43, p < 0.01). The medial tibial joint line elevation was also correlated with reduced loosening of the joint knee extension (R = − 0.42, p < 0.01). This, in turn, resulted in limited improvement of the knee extension angle. Moreover, joint line elevation under 5 mm significantly improved knee extension angle compared to joint line elevation over 5 mm.

Conclusions

The medial joint line elevation of the tibia in UKA reduced the improvement of knee extension angle, due to a reduced joint looseness at knee extension. A tibial joint line elevation greater than 5 mm in UKA should be avoided to prevent postoperative flexion contracture. For the clinical relevance, this study clarified that the medial joint line of the tibia is an important factor to prevent postoperative flexion contracture in UKA.

Level of evidence

II.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Abbreviations

UKA:

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

TKA:

Total knee arthroplasty

ROM:

Range of motion

HKA:

Hip–knee–ankle angle

SD:

Standard deviation

KSKS:

Knee Society Knee Score

KSFS:

Knee Society Function Score

References

  1. 1.

    Akizuki S, Mueller JK, Horiuchi H et al (2009) In vivo determination of kinematics for subjects having a Zimmer unicompartmental high flex knee system. J Arthroplasty 24:963–971

  2. 2.

    Amin AK, Patton JT, Cook RE et al (2006) Unicompartmental or total knee arthroplasty?: Results from a matched study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 451:101–106

  3. 3.

    Bong MR, Di Cesare PE (2004) Stiffness after total knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 12:164–171

  4. 4.

    Cope MR, O’Brien BS, Nanu AM (2002) The influence of the posterior cruciate ligament in the maintenance of joint line in primary total knee arthroplasty: a radiologic study. J Arthroplasty 17:206–208

  5. 5.

    Figgie HE, 3rd, Goldberg VM, Heiple KG et al (1986) The influence of tibial-patellofemoral location on function of the knee in patients with the posterior stabilized condylar knee prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 68:1035–1040

  6. 6.

    Kuwashima U, Okazaki K, Tashiro Y et al (2015) Correction of coronal alignment correlates with reconstruction of joint height in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint Res 4:128–133

  7. 7.

    Laskin RS (2002) Joint line position restoration during revision total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 404:169–171

  8. 8.

    Maeno S, Kondo M, Niki Y et al (2006) Patellar impingement against the tibial component after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 452:265–269

  9. 9.

    Martin JW, Whiteside LA (1990) The influence of joint line position on knee stability after condylar knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 259:146–156

  10. 10.

    Matsumoto T, Hashimura M, Takayama K et al (2015) A radiographic analysis of alignment of the lower extremities—initiation and progression of varus-type knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 23:217–223

  11. 11.

    Matsumoto T, Muratsu H, Kubo S et al (2013) Intra-operative joint gap kinematics in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Biomech (Bristol Avon) 28:29–33

  12. 12.

    Matsuzaki T, Matsumoto T, Muratsu H et al (2017) The contribution of intraoperative medial compartment stability to post-operative knee flexion angle in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:272–276

  13. 13.

    Nagamine R, Miura H, Bravo CV et al (2000) Anatomic variations should be considered in total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci 5:232–237

  14. 14.

    Nakano N, Matsumoto T, Hashimura M et al (2016) Coronal lower limb alignment in normal knees—a radiographic analysis of 797 normal knee subjects. Knee 23:209–213

  15. 15.

    Newman JH, Ackroyd CE, Shah NA (1998) Unicompartmental or total knee replacement? Five-year results of a prospective, randomised trial of 102 osteoarthritic knees with unicompartmental arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:862–865

  16. 16.

    Nwachukwu BU, McCormick FM, Schairer WW et al (2014) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus high tibial osteotomy: United States practice patterns for the surgical treatment of unicompartmental arthritis. J Arthroplasty 29:1586–1589

  17. 17.

    Partington PF, Sawhney J, Rorabeck CH et al (1999) Joint line restoration after revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 367:165–171

  18. 18.

    Riddle DL, Jiranek WA, McGlynn FJ (2008) Yearly incidence of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the United States. J Arthroplasty 23:408–412

  19. 19.

    Ryu J, Saito S, Yamamoto K et al (1993) Factors influencing the postoperative range of motion in total knee arthroplasty. Bull Hosp Joint Dis 53:35–40

  20. 20.

    Scuderi GR (2005) The stiff total knee arthroplasty: causality and solution. J Arthroplasty 20:23–26

  21. 21.

    Siman H, Kamath AF, Carrillo N et al (2017) Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty vs total knee arthroplasty for medial compartment arthritis in patients older than 75 years: comparable reoperation, revision, and complication rates. J Arthroplasty 32:1792–1797

  22. 22.

    Singerman R, Heiple KG, Davy DT et al (1995) Effect of tibial component position on patellar strain following total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 10:651–656

  23. 23.

    Takayama K, Matsumoto T, Muratsu H et al (2016) The influence of posterior tibial slope changes on joint gap and range of motion in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee 23:517–522

  24. 24.

    Takayama K, Matsumoto T, Muratsu H et al (2015) The tibia first technique with tensor measurement is useful to predict the soft tissue tension after implantation in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 39:667–671

  25. 25.

    Takayama K, Matsumoto T, Muratsu H et al (2015) Joint gap assessment with a tensor is useful for the selection of insert thickness in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Clin Biomech (Bristol Avon) 30:95–99

  26. 26.

    Vasso M, Del Regno C, D’Amelio A et al (2015) Minor varus alignment provides better results than neutral alignment in medial UKA. Knee 22:117–121

Download references

Author information

KT: study design, data collection, and writing the paper. KI: study design and data analysis, HM: study design, YK: data collection. MT: data collection. SH: data analysis. SH: data analysis. TM: study design. TN: study design. RK: study design. TM: study design, data analysis, and writing the paper.

Correspondence to Koji Takayama.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Funding

There was no external source of funding for this study.

Ethical approval

Approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee at Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Takayama, K., Ishida, K., Muratsu, H. et al. The medial tibial joint line elevation over 5 mm restrained the improvement of knee extension angle in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26, 1737–1742 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4763-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty
  • Joint line
  • Range of motion
  • Gap