Importance of a radial head component in Sorbie unlinked total elbow arthroplasty

The effects of a radial head component on total elbow arthroplasty kinematics and stability were evaluated using an anatomic design unlinked total elbow prosthesis. An electromagnetic tracking device recorded motion and varus and valgus displacements under various conditions in 10 cadaveric elbows. The motion patterns of the intact elbows and the Sorbie-Questor total elbow prostheses with a radial head component were similar, as both tended to have a valgus position in extension, varus at midflexion, and more valgus toward full flexion. Under conditions of simulated muscle loading, the maximum valgus and varus laxity of the elbow prosthesis was, on average, 8.6 degrees +/- 4.0 degrees greater than normal. Without the radial head component, however, significant kinematic disturbances and instabilities were seen. The varus and valgus displacements were 13.3 degrees +/- 5.5 degrees greater than the intact elbows. One total elbow arthroplasty without a radial head dislocated during testing. Increasing the muscle loading across the elbow significantly enhanced dynamic stability of the total elbow arthroplasties, especially in the extension half of elbow motion where instability is greatest. However, this dynamic enhancement of stability was seen only in those elbows in which the radial head component had been implanted. The radial head component is an important stabilizer, particularly in extension for this prosthesis, and possibly for other unlinked total elbow prostheses. Although instability of unlinked prostheses depends on the prosthetic design, the use of a radial head replacement may be an important factor in preventing such instability. Perhaps even more importantly, a radial head component balances the load distribution across the articulation, which could decrease stress on the ulnohumeral articulation and therefore possibly reduce polyethylene wear, osteolysis, and loosening.     

Metallic radial head arthroplasty improves valgus stability of the elbow

The stabilizing influence of radial head arthroplasty was studied in eight medial collateral ligament deficient anatomic specimen elbows. An elbow testing apparatus, which used computer controlled pneumatic actuators to apply tendon loading, was used to simulate active elbow flexion. The motion pathways of the elbow were measured using an electromagnetic tracking device, with the forearm in supination and pronation. As a measure of stability, the maximum varus to valgus laxity over the range of elbow flexion was determined from the difference between varus and valgus gravity loaded motion pathways. After transection of the medial collateral ligament, the radial head was excised and replaced with either a silicone or one of three metallic radial head prostheses. Medial collateral ligament transection caused a significant increase in the maximum varus to valgus laxity to 18.0 degrees +/- 3.2 degrees. After radial head excision, this laxity increased to 35.6 degrees +/- 10.3 degrees. The silicone implant conferred no increase in elbow stability, with a maximum varus to valgus laxity of 32.5 degrees +/- 15.5 degrees. All three metallic implants improved the valgus stability of the medial collateral ligament deficient elbow, providing stability similar to the intact radial head. The use of silicone arthroplasty to replace the radial head in the medial collateral ligament deficient elbow must be questioned. Metallic radial head arthroplasty provides improved valgus stability, approaching that of an intact radial head.     

Elbow joint kinematics after excision of the radial head.

The contribution of the radial head to elbow joint kinematics was studied in 7 osteoligamentous elbow preparations. During unloaded flexion and extension, radial head excision induced a maximum varus displacement of 1.6 degrees with 20 degrees of joint flexion and a maximum external rotation of 3.2 degrees at 110 degrees of flexion. With application of a 0.75-Nm load, radial head excision induced a maximum laxity of 3.3 degrees at 20 degrees of flexion in forced varus and a maximum laxity of 8.9 degrees at 10 degrees of flexion in forced external rotation. No laxity was observed in forced valgus or internal rotation. The results were independent of the rotation of the forearm. This study indicates that the radial head acts as stabilizer to the elbow joint in forced varus and in forced external rotation. The results suggest that fractures of the radial head cannot be treated by simple excision without altering the basic kinematics of the elbow joint.     

Contribution of monoblock and bipolar radial head prostheses to valgus stability of the elbow.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the stabilizing effect of radial head replacement in cadaver elbows with a deficient medial collateral ligament. METHODS: Passive elbow flexion with the forearm in neutral rotation and in 80 degrees of pronation and supination was performed under valgus and varus loads (1) in intact elbows, (2) after a surgical approach (lateral epicondylar osteotomy of the distal part of the humerus), (3) after release of the anterior bundle of the medial collateral ligament, (4) after release of the anterior bundle of the medial collateral ligament and resection of the radial head, and (5) after subsequent replacement of the radial head with each of three different types of radial head prostheses (a Wright monoblock titanium implant, a KPS bipolar Vitallium [cobalt-chromium]-polyethylene implant, and a Judet bipolar Vitallium-polyethylene-Vitallium implant) in the same cadaver elbow. Total valgus elbow laxity was quantified with use of an electromagnetic tracking device. RESULTS: The mean valgus laxity changed significantly (p < 0.001) as a factor of constraint alteration. The greatest laxity was observed after release of the medial collateral ligament together with resection of the radial head (11.1 degrees +/- 5.6 degrees). Less laxity was seen following release of the medial collateral ligament alone (6.8 degrees +/- 3.4 degrees), and the least laxity was seen in the intact state (3.4 degrees +/- 1.6 degrees). Forearm rotation had a significant effect (p = 0.003) on valgus laxity throughout the range of flexion. The laxity was always greater in pronation than it was in neutral rotation or in supination. The mean valgus laxity values for the elbows with a deficient medial collateral ligament and an implant were significantly greater than those for the medial collateral ligament-deficient elbows before radial head resection (p < 0.05). The implants all performed similarly except in neutral forearm rotation, in which the elbow laxity associated with the Judet implant was significantly greater than that associated with the other two implants. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study showed that a bipolar radial head prosthesis can be as effective as a solid monoblock prosthesis in restoring valgus stability in a medial collateral ligament-deficient elbow. However, none of the prostheses functioned as well as the native radial head, suggesting that open reduction and internal fixation to restore radial head anatomy is preferable to replacement when possible.     

Effect of flexion angle on coronal laxity in patients with mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty prostheses

Proper soft tissue tension is one of the important factors in mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We evaluated varus/valgus laxities, particularly at flexion, which is a key factor in reducing the risk of subluxation and dislocation of bearings to assess the effect that the flexion angle and the presence or absence of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) have on laxity in patients with low-contact stress (LCS) prostheses of the PCL-retaining (24 patients, 24 knees) and PCL-sacrificing (24 patients, 24 knees) type designs during extension and flexion. Both types of prosthesis had about 4° laxity at extension and 3° at flexion. PCL-retaining prostheses had significantly less laxity at flexion than at extension (P = 0.0004 in varus, P = 0.0043 in valgus). For good clinical outcomes following TKA, 3°–4° laxity in the varus and valgus orientations is recommended. In addition, the PCL might be involved in flexion and could affect varus/valgus laxity in PCL-retaining prostheses.     

Role of collateral ligaments in the GSB-linked total elbow prosthesis.

The GSB III elbow prosthesis is a loose-hinged type of elbow implant. The introduction of such hinged elbow arthroplasty expanded the indications for elbow replacement to patients with more deficient bone and ligaments. The purpose of this study was to compare the kinematics and stability of the GSB III elbow prosthesis with that of the normal elbow and to investigate the role of the collateral ligaments in the kinematics and the stability of the GSB III total elbow prosthesis in an in vitro model. The results could show a semiconstrained kinematic pattern of the GSB III implant. The mean laxity for varus/valgus stress of the implant without collateral ligament support was significantly greater for all flexion angles when compared with intact elbows (mean, 12.7 degrees versus 5.4 degrees ) and with elbows treated with a standard implantation technique (mean, 9.5 degrees ). The release of the collateral ligaments increased the already observed varus shift after standard implantation of a GSB III elbow prosthesis. The laxity measured without collateral ligaments during loaded movement reached the maximum varus/valgus laxity of the GSB III prosthesis of 12 degrees degrees. The study confirms the role of the collateral ligaments in stabilizing the GSB III elbow prosthesis. Missing collateral ligaments may overload the implant-cement-bone interface and may be one factor contributing to early aseptic loosening of this device.     

Kinematics of semi-constrained total elbow arthroplasty.

We used 11 cadaver elbows and a three-dimensional electromagnetic tracking device to record elbow movements before and after implantation of a 'loose-hinged' elbow prosthesis (modified Coonrad). During simulated active motion there was a maximum of 2.7 degrees (+/- 1.5 degrees) varus/valgus laxity in the cadaver joints. This increased slightly after total elbow arthroplasty to 3.8 degrees (+/- 1.4 degrees). These values are lower than those recorded for the cadaver joints and for the prostheses at the limits of their varus/valgus displacements, indicating that both behave as 'semi-constrained' joints under physiological conditions. They suggest that the muscles absorb some of the forces and moments that in a constrained prosthesis would be transferred to the prosthesis-bone interface.     

Elbow joint laxity after experimental radial head excision and lateral collateral ligament rupture: efficacy of prosthetic replacement and ligament repair

The objectives of this experimental study were to investigate the effect of radial head excision and lateral collateral ligament (LCL) division on elbow joint laxity and to determine the efficacy of radial head prosthetic replacement and LCL repair. Valgus, varus, internal rotation, and external rotation of the ulna were measured during passive flexion-extension and application of a 0.75-Nm torque in 6 intact cadaveric elbows and after (1) either excision of the radial head or division of the LCL, (2) removal of both constraints, (3) isolated radial head prosthetic replacement, (4) isolated LCL repair, and (5) radial head replacement combined with LCL repair. Isolated radial head excision increased varus (mean, 4.8 degrees) and external rotatory laxity (mean, 7.1 degrees), as did isolated LCL division (mean, 14.1 degrees for varus; mean, 14.7 degrees for external rotation). After removal of both constraints, varus and external rotatory laxities were increased by 19.0 degrees and 20.1 degrees, respectively, compared with the intact specimens. Isolated radial head replacement reduced mean varus laxity to 14.6 degrees and mean external rotatory laxity to 14.8 degrees. Isolated LCL repair normalized varus laxity but resulted in a 2.9 degrees increase in external rotatory laxity. The combined procedures restored laxity completely. The radial head is a constraint to varus and external rotation in the elbow joint, functioning by maintaining tension in the LCL. Still, removal of both constraints induces severe laxity, and in this case, prosthetic replacement may substitute for the constraining capacity of the native radial head. The combination of LCL repair and radial head replacement restores laxity completely, but an isolated LCL repair performs almost as well, probably by compensating for the ligamentous tension lost from radial head excision.     

Transverse Coronoid Fracture: When Does It Have to Be Fixed?

Background

After elbow fracture-dislocation, surgeons confront numerous treatment options in pursuing a stable joint for early motion. The relative contributions of the radial head and coronoid, in combination, to elbow stability have not been defined fully.

Questions/purposes

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of an approximately 50% transverse coronoid fracture and fixation in the setting of an intact or resected radial head on coronal (varus/valgus) and axial (internal and external rotational) laxity in (1) gravity varus stress; and (2) gravity valgus stress models.

Methods

Kinematic data were collected on six fresh-frozen cadaveric upper extremities tested with passive motion throughout the flexion arc under varus and valgus gravity stress with lateral collateral ligaments reconstructed. Testing included coronoid fracture and osteosynthesis with and without a radial head.

Results

In the varus gravity stress model, fixation of the coronoid improved varus stability (fixed: 1.6° [95% confidence interval, 1.0–2.2], fractured: 5.6° [4.2–7.0], p < 0.001) and internal rotational stability (fixed: 1.8° [0.9–2.7], fractured: 5.4° [4.0–6.8], p < 0.001), but radial head fixation did not contribute to varus stability (intact head: 2.7° [1.3–4.1], resected head: 3.8° [2.3–5.3], p = 0.4) or rotational stability (intact: 2.7° [0.9–4.5], resected head: 3.9° [1.5–6.3], p = 0.4). With valgus stress, coronoid fixation improved valgus stability (fixed: 2.1° [1.0–3.1], fractured: 3.8° [1.8–5.8], p < 0.04) and external rotation stability (fixed: 0.8° [0.1–1.5], fractured: 2.1° [0.9–3.4], p < 0.04), but the radial head played a more important role in providing valgus stability (intact: 1.4° [0.8–2.0], resected head: 7.1° [3.5–10.7], p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Fixation of a 50% transverse coronoid fracture improves varus and internal rotatory laxity but is unlikely to meaningfully improve valgus or external rotation laxity. The radial head, on the other hand, is a stabilizer to resist valgus stress regardless of the status of the coronoid.

Clinical Relevance

Determination as to whether it is necessary to fix a coronoid fracture should be based on the stability of the elbow when tested with a varus load. The elbow may potentially be stable with fractures involving less than 50% of the coronoid. Under all circumstances, the radial head should be fixed or replaced to ensure valgus external rotatory stability.     

Detrimental effects of overstuffing or understuffing with a radial head replacement in the medial collateral-ligament deficient elbow

BACKGROUND: Comminuted radial head fractures associated with an injury of the medial collateral ligament can be treated with a radial head implant. We hypothesized that lengthening and shortening of the radial neck would alter the kinematics and the pressure through the radiocapitellar joint in the medial collateral ligament-deficient elbow. METHODS: The effects of lengthening (2.5 and 5 mm) and shortening (2.5 and 5 mm) of the radial neck were assessed in six human cadaveric upper extremities in which the medial collateral ligament had been surgically released. The three-dimensional spatial orientation of the ulna was recorded during simulated active motion from extension to flexion. Total varus-valgus laxity and ulnar rotation were measured. Radiocapitellar joint pressure was assessed with use of pressure-sensitive film. RESULTS: Radial neck lengthening or shortening of >/=2.5 mm significantly changed the kinematics in the medial collateral ligament-deficient elbow. Lengthening caused a significant decrease (p < 0.05) in varus-valgus laxity and ulnar rotation (p < 0.05), with the ulna tracking in varus and external rotation. Shortening caused a significant increase in varus-valgus laxity (p < 0.05) and ulnar rotation (p < 0.05), with the ulna tracking in valgus and internal rotation. The pressure on the radiocapitellar joint was significantly increased after 2.5 mm of lengthening. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that accurate restoration of radial length is important and that axial understuffing or overstuffing of the radiohumeral joint by >/=2.5 mm alters both elbow kinematics and radiocapitellar pressure. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This in vitro cadaver study indicates that a radial head replacement should be performed with the same level of concern for accuracy and reproducibility of component position and orientation as is appropriate with any other prosthesis.     

Radial head fracture in the medial collateral ligament deficient elbow; biomechanical comparison of fixation, replacement and excision in human cadavers

A widely used clinical recommendation is that in the presence of medial collateral ligament injuries, two-part radial head fractures should be fixed rather than excising or replacing the radial head. Direct biomechanical data comparing fracture fixation, radial head replacement and excision in a human cadaveric elbow model, have not been previously described. Such comparison is clinically important as with the increasing availability of radial head implants and promising follow up results, the role of radial head replacement in fracture management may have to be redefined. In this study, five fresh cadaveric elbows had radial head fracture creation and medial collateral ligament division, fracture fixation, radial head replacement and excision. Valgus and varus laxity were determined using an electromagnetic tracking system. Radial head replacement leads to a similar valgus (P=0.80) [corrected] laxity as compared to radial head fixation. Radial head excision resulted in a significantly greater valgus laxity as compared to radial head fixation (P=0.02) or replacement (P=0.03). Both radial head excision and replacement led to a greater varus laxity as compared to fixation. Our results suggest that in the elbow with medial collateral ligament injury and two-part radial head fracture, fixation is overall biomechanically superior as compared to replacement and excision.     

Coronal Laxity at Flexion is Larger After Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty Than With Cruciate-Retaining Procedures

BackgroundIt is unclear whether coronal stability differs between cruciate-retaining (CR) and posterior-stabilized (PS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to compare coronal laxity, radiological, and clinical outcomes between CR-TKA and PS-TKA.MethodsSeventy five CR-TKAs and 72 PS-TKAs with a minimum 2-year follow-up were retrospectively evaluated. Coronal laxity was assessed at knee extension and 80° of flexion on varus and valgus stress radiographs. Radiological evaluation included femoral-tibial angle, hip-knee-ankle angle, and positions of femoral and tibial components. Clinical evaluation included the modified Hospital for Special Surgery score, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index, and range of motion.ResultsPS-TKA resulted in significantly larger varus, valgus, and total laxities at 80° flexion (P = .034, .031, and 0.001, respectively) compared with CR-TKA, while no significant difference was found at extension (P = .513, .964, and .658, respectively). No statistical difference was found in radiological and clinical outcomes between CR-TKA and PS-TKA, but the functional scores were slightly better in CR-TKA. There were adverse correlations between varus laxity at flexion and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index, the modified Hospital for Special Surgery score, and range of motion (r = 0.933, −0.229, −0.472, respectively).ConclusionCoronal laxity at 80° of flexion was larger after PS-TKA than CR-TKA. In addition, clinical outcomes were adversely affected by the larger varus laxity at flexion. Care should be taken to maintain the coronal stability, especially at flexion, during surgery to obtain better patient-reported outcomes.Level of evidenceLevel III.     

Valgus stability of the elbow. A definition of primary and secondary constraints

The stabilizing structures of the elbow that resist valgus stress were studied with a tracking device in a model simulating active motion and muscle activity. By varying the order of serial release of the medial collateral ligament complex and removal of the radial head, each structure's contribution to valgus stability against the effect of gravity was determined. In the otherwise intact elbow, absence of the radial head does not significantly alter the three-dimensional characteristics of motion in the elbow joint. Isolated medial collateral release, on the other hand, causes increases in abduction rotation of about 6 degrees-8 degrees in magnitude. Releasing both structures results in gross abduction laxity and elbow subluxation. This study defines the medial collateral ligament (MCL) as the primary constraint of the elbow joint to valgus stress and the radial head as a secondary constraint. This definition facilitates the proper management of patients with radial head fractures and MCL disruption. The comminuted radial head fracture uncomplicated by MCL insufficiency should be treated by excision without the need for an implant and without concern of altering the normal kinematics of the elbow.     

Radial Head Reconstruction in Elbow Fracture-Dislocation: Monopolar or Bipolar Prosthesis?

Background

Monopolar and bipolar radial head prosthetic arthroplasties have been used successfully to treat elbow fracture-dislocation with unsalvageable radial head fractures. The relative stability of these two designs in different clinical situations is a topic of ongoing investigation.

Questions/purposes

We tested the effects of monopolar and bipolar fixed-neck prosthetic radial head implants on improvement in elbow coronal and axial plane laxity in a terrible triad biomechanical model that accounted for lateral collateral ligament integrity and the presence of a transverse coronoid fracture.

Methods

Kinematic data were collected on six fresh-frozen cadaveric upper extremities tested with passive motion throughout the flexion arc. Varus and valgus gravity stress were applied with the wrist in neutral position. A lateral collateral ligament reconstruction was simulated. We assessed instability after radial head resection and reconstruction with either a monopolar or bipolar implant in the presence of a transversely fractured (Regan and Morrey Type 2) or fixed coronoid process.

Results

With collateral ligament integrity, no difference was detected, with the numbers available, in valgus laxity between implants under valgus stress (p = 1.0). Laxity improvement with each prosthesis was higher when the coronoid was fractured (mean ± SD: monopolar: 7.4° ± 1.6°, p < 0.001; bipolar: 6.4° ± 1.6°, p = 0.003) than when it was fixed (monopolar: 4.0° ± 1.6°, p = 0.02; bipolar: 4.2° ± 1.6°, p = 0.01). With the numbers available, there was no difference in external rotation laxity between implants under valgus stress (p = 1.0). The greatest stabilizing effect of the prostheses occurred when the coronoid was fractured (monopolar: 3.3° ± 1.2°, p = 0.15; bipolar: 3.3° ± 1.2°, p = 0.17). Radial head arthroplasty offered no substantial stability under varus stress for varus or internal rotation laxity.

Conclusions

In our terrible triad cadaveric model, coronoid fixation was effective in improving varus laxity with a monopolar or bipolar prosthesis in place. Also, both types of prostheses were effective in improving valgus and external rotation laxity to the elbow, regardless of coronoid status. With collateral ligaments reconstructed, no large kinematic differences were noted between implants regardless of the varus-valgus position or whether the coronoid was fractured or fixed.

Clinical Relevance

The data from our cadaveric model support the use of either implant type in terrible triad injuries if the collateral ligaments are intact or reconstructed.     

Ligament balancing in revision total knee arthroplasty

Ligament balancing in revision total knee arthroplasty involves placement and sizing of the femoral and tibial components and balancing procedures for the ligaments. A simplified technique is presented for sizing and positioning the implants and for balancing the ligaments. Eighty-nine knees with severe bone loss were treated with ligament-sparing exposure and bone-sparing resection techniques. The knees were stabilized by the spacer effect of the implants in flexion and extension, and nonlinked components were used. None of the knees had symptomatic instability, recurvatum, or flexion contracture. Five years after surgery the mean valgus laxity was 3 degrees +/- 2.5 degrees and the mean varus laxity was 4.5 degrees +/- 3.3 degrees Laxity did not increase after 10 years followup. The techniques used in this series have proven to be simple and reproducible, and to provide long-term reliability.     

Changes of elbow muscle moment arms after total elbow arthroplasty

The changes of muscle moment arms on the elbow during simulated active motion were calculated from the simultaneous kinematic and tendon excursion in six cadaver specimens. The results after four different Coonrad-Morrey total elbow arthroplasty positions of implantation were compared with those of the intact elbow. With optimal total elbow arthroplasty implantation, the general pattern of change of the muscle moment arms with elbow flexion resembled that of the intact elbow, but with increased flexor dominance over the extensors with elbow flexion. No significant modification of the muscle moment arms was related to the changes of positioning of the implants, except with 60° elbow flexion, a slight increase of the brachialis muscle moment arms with distal placement of the humeral component. The malplacements of the humeral component in varus/valgus or in internal/external rotation were found to significantly affect the muscle moment arms.     

The effect of radial head fracture size on elbow kinematics and stability.

This study determined the effect of radial head fracture size and ligament injury on elbow kinematics. Eight cadaveric upper extremities were studied in an in vitro elbow simulator. Testing was performed with ligaments intact, with the medial collateral (MCL) or lateral collateral (LCL) ligament detached, and with both the MCL and LCL detached. Thirty degree wedges were sequentially removed from the anterolateral radial head up to 120 degrees . Valgus angulation and external rotation of the ulna relative to the humerus were determined for passive motion, active motion, and pivot shift testing with the arm in a vertical (dependent) orientation. Maximum varus-valgus laxity was calculated from measurements of varus and valgus angulation with the arm in horizontal gravity-loaded positions. No effect of increasing radial head fracture size was observed on valgus angulation during passive and active motion in the dependent position. In supination, external rotation increased with increasing fracture size during passive motion with LCL deficiency and both MCL and LCL deficiency. With intact ligaments, maximum varus-valgus laxity increased with increasing radial head fracture size. With ligament disruption, elbows were grossly unstable, and no effect of increasing radial head fracture size occurred. During pivot shift testing, performed with the ligaments intact, subtle instability was noted after resection of one-third of the radial head. In this in vitro biomechanical study, small subtle effects of radial head fracture size on elbow kinematics and stability were seen in both the ligament intact and ligament deficient elbows. These data suggest that fixation of displaced radial head fractures less than or equal to one-third of the articular diameter may have some biomechanical advantages; however, clinical correlation is required.     

增加胫骨平台后倾角度、后交叉韧带部分松解对全膝关节置换术后膝关节运动影响的实验研究

目的通过增加胫骨平台后倾角度或后交叉韧带（PCL）部分松解对全膝关节置换术（TKA）中屈曲间隙过紧进行处理,分析这两种方法对TKA术后膝关节运动学的影响。方法测量6例新鲜尸体膝关节标本在完整状态下、正常TKA、屈曲间隙过紧、增加胫骨平台后倾角以及PCL部分松解TKA术后膝关节屈曲0°、30°、60°、90°、120°时的前后松弛度、内外翻松弛度、旋转松弛度及最大屈曲度。结果屈曲过紧TKA与正常TKA相比,在屈曲30°、60°、90°和120°时前后松弛度、内外翻松弛度及旋转松弛度均显著较小（P〈0．05）。与屈曲过紧TKA相比,增加胫骨后倾角后,在屈曲30°、60°、90°和120°时前后松弛度、内外翻松弛度和旋转松弛度均明显增大（P〈0．05）。PCL部分松解与屈曲过紧TKA相比,在屈曲30°、60°、90°和120°时前后松弛度明显增加（P〈0．05）;旋转松弛度在屈曲30°、60°、90°时明显增加（P〈0．05）。与PCL部分松解相比,增加胫骨后倾角的内外翻松弛度在屈曲30°、60°、90°时明显较大（P〈0．05）;旋转松弛度在屈曲0°、30°、60°和90°时明显较大（P〈0．05）。屈曲过紧TKA的最大屈曲度（120．4°）与正常TKA（130．3°）及增加胫骨后倾角（131．1°）相比明显较小（P〈0．05）。增加后倾角与PCL部分松解（124．0°）相比,最大屈曲度较大,但差异无统计学意义（P=0．0816）。结论屈曲间隙过紧TKA术后膝关节的前后松弛度、内外翻松弛度、旋转松弛度和最大屈曲度均减小;增加胫骨平台后倾角后,前后松弛度、内外翻松弛度、旋转松弛度和最大屈曲度均明显增大;PCL部分松解仅能明显增大前后松弛度。因此对于TKA术中屈曲紧张的膝关节,增加胫骨平台后倾角比PCL部分松解能更好地改善膝关节的运动学。     

重建肘关节外翻稳定性的生物力学研究

目的　评价肘关节桡骨头 (radial head,RH)切除、尺侧副韧带 (medial collateral ligament,MCL )损伤以及 RH假体置换、MCL重建后的外翻稳定性。　方法　新鲜成人尸体上肢标本 12侧 ,制成肘关节“骨 -韧带”标本 ,在2 N· m的外翻力矩作用下 ,分别在肘关节 0°、30°、6 0°、90°和 12 0°伸屈时 ,测量肘关节外翻松弛度 :1完整肘关节(n=12 ) ;2 MCL切断 (n=6 ) ;3RH切除 (n=6 ) ;4 MCL切断 +RH切除 (n=12 ) ;5 RH假体置换 (n=6 ) ;6 MCL重建(n=6 ) ;7RH假体置换 +MCL重建 (n=12 )。用 SPSS 10 .0统计软件包作方差分析 ,比较各组的外翻稳定性。　结果　完整肘关节的平均外翻松弛度最小 ;RH切除后 ,外翻松弛度增大 ;单纯 MCL切断 ,外翻松弛度大于单纯 RH切除 (P<0 .0 1) ;MCL切断 +RH切除 ,外翻稳定性最差 ;行 RH假体置换 ,对稳定性有改善 ;MCL重建与完整 MCL差异无统计学意义 (P>0 .0 5 ) ;RH假体置换同时重建 MCL ,效果最好。　结论　 MCL是抵抗肘关节外翻应力最主要的因素 ,RH是次要因素。在重建肘关节的外翻稳定性方面 ,MCL的重建比 RH的假体置换更重要。在无条件行 RH假体置换时 ,修复MCL是较好的手术方式。