Advertisement

Sport Sciences for Health

, Volume 4, Issue 1–2, pp 1–6 | Cite as

Motion analysis after total knee arthroplasty

  • Corrado Sosio
  • Roberto Gatti
  • Manuela Corti
  • Elena Locatelli
  • Gianfranco Fraschini
Original Article

Abstract

The aim of this study is to evaluate the functional performance after total knee replacement (TKR). Two groups of patients, one with mobile (n=9) and one with fixed bearing (n=8) total knee prosthesis, were compared by means of motion analysis. A group of healthy subjects (n=8), matched by age, were used as controls. Kinematics, kinetics and electromyography data were collected during physiological daily activities such as walking and squatting. During walking, both groups of patients showed a speed of progression, a maximum knee extension moment (stance phase) and a maximum knee flexion (swing phase) significantly lower than the control group. Moreover, during the swing phase a co-contraction of the antagonistic muscles of the inferior limb was present. During squatting, both groups of patients showed a peak of knee flexion significantly lower than the control group. Motion pattern after TKR is unphysiological but the abnormalities seem to be independent from the differences in the implant designs.

Key words

Mobile bearing prosthesis Fixed bearing prosthesis Gait analysis Squat Total knee arthroplasty 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Andriacchi TP, Galante JO, Farmier RW (1982) The influence of total knee replacement design on walking and stairclimbing. J Bone Joint Surg 64A:1328–1351Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Simon SR, Trieshmann HW, Burdett RG et al (1983) Quantitative gait analysis after total knee arthroplasty for monarticular degenerative arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg 65A:605–613Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fisher NM, White SC, Yack HJ et al (1997) Muscle function and gait in patients with knee osteoarthritis before and after muscle rehabilitation. Dis Rehab 19:47–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tibone JE, Antich TJ, Fanton GS et al (1986) Functional analysis of anterior cruciate ligament instability. Am J Sports Med 14:276–284PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berchuck M, Andriacchi TP, Bach BR, Reider B (1990) Gait adaptations by patients who have a deficient anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg 72A:871–877Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weinstein JN, Andriacchi TP, Galante J (1986) Factors influencing walking and stairclimbing following unicompartimental knee arthroplasty. J Artrhoplasty 1:109–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mikosz RP, Rosemberg AG, Haberman TM (1993) A comparison of postoperative function between patients with unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasties. Trans. 38th Ann. Meet. Orthop. Res. Soc. 18:359.qGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dorr LD, Ochsner JL, Gronley J, Perry J (1988) Functional comparison of posterior cruciate-retained versus cruciate-sacrificed total knee arthroplasty. Clin Ortop 236:36–43Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wilson SA, McCann PD, Gotlin RS et al (1996) Comprehensive gait analysis in posterior-stabilized knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 11:359–367PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bolanos AA, Colizza WA, McCann PD et al (1998) A comparison of isokinetic strength testing and gait analysis in patients with posterior cruciate-retaining and substituting knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty 13:906–915PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kramers-de Quervain IA, Stussi E, Muller R et al (1997) Quantitative gait analysis after bilateral total knee arthroplasty with two different systems within each subject. J Arthroplasty 12:777–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Catani F, Benedetti MG, De Felice R et al (2003) Mobile and fixed bearing total knee prosthesis functional comparison during stair climbing. Clin Biomech 18:410–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Davis RB (1997) Reflections on clinical gait analysis. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 7:251–257PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hermens H, Freriks B, Merletti R (2000) Raccomandazioni europee per l’elettromiografia di superficie. I risultati del progetto SENIAM. Italiana C.L.U.T., TorinoGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Perry J (1992) Gait analysis: normal and pathological function. SLACK Inc, ThorofareGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Andriacchi TP (1993) Functional analysis of pre and post-knee surgery: total knee arthroplasty and ACL reconstruction. J Biomech Eng 115:575–581PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Benoit DL, Ramsey DK, Lamontagne M et al (2005) Effect of skin movement artifact on knee kinematics during gait and cutting. Gait Posture 24:152–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dennis DA, Komistek RD, Mahfouz MR et al (2003) Multicenter determination of in vivo kinematics after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 416:37–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stiehl JB, Dennis DA, Komistek RD, Keblish PA (1997) In vivo kinematic analysis of a mobile bearing total knee prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 345:60–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Corrado Sosio
    • 1
  • Roberto Gatti
    • 2
  • Manuela Corti
    • 2
  • Elena Locatelli
    • 1
  • Gianfranco Fraschini
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedics and TraumatologySan Raffaele Scientific Institute Vita-Salute UniversityMilanItaly
  2. 2.Laboratory of Motion Analysis San Raffaele Scientific Institute School of PhysiotherapyVita-Salute UniversityMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations