gms | German Medical Science

54. Jahrestagung der Norddeutschen Orthopädenvereinigung e. V.

Norddeutsche Orthopädenvereinigung

16.06. bis 18.06.2005, Hamburg

Quantitative load depending gap-balancing for PCL retaining TKR

Meeting Abstract

Suche in Medline nach

  • corresponding author P. Ritschl - Orthopädisches Krankenhaus der Stadt Wien Gersthof, I. Orthopädische Abteilung, Wien
  • F. Machacek - Wien
  • R. Fuiko - Wien

Norddeutsche Orthopädenvereinigung. 54. Jahrestagung der Norddeutschen Orthopädenvereinigung e.V.. Hamburg, 16.-18.06.2005. Düsseldorf, Köln: German Medical Science; 2005. Doc05novK4.04

Die elektronische Version dieses Artikels ist vollständig und ist verfügbar unter: http://www.egms.de/de/meetings/nov2005/05nov012.shtml

Veröffentlicht: 13. Juni 2005

© 2005 Ritschl et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open Access-Artikel und steht unter den Creative Commons Lizenzbedingungen (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/deed.de). Er darf vervielf&aauml;ltigt, verbreitet und &oauml;ffentlich zug&aauml;nglich gemacht werden, vorausgesetzt dass Autor und Quelle genannt werden.


Gliederung

Text

Introduction

The outcome of TKR is strongly influenced by the ligamentous stability. Navigation Systems support precise axis reconstruction reliably. Soft tissue balancing is still a field of experience. Quantitative soft tissue balancing for the individual patient is still not defined. Surgical navigation can be a valuable tool to quantify and improve soft tissue parameters during surgery.

Method

The two surgical strategies-bone referencing (group A) and soft-tissue based (group B) were formulated in the workflow of a surgical navigation system (PiGalileo, Aarau Switzerland). The bone referencing technique (A: 47 patients) was based on classical Landmarks, performing resections before soft-tissue balancing. Soft tissue balancing (B: 47 patients) was carried out using a quantitative, force controlled, compartment-specific ligament-tensioner in 0 degree and 90 degree flexion before performing bone-resections. Component alignment and reconstruction of the joint line are visualised and adjusted in regard to the defined ligament stability.

With the prosthetic components implanted the joint function (ROM, stability, alignment) was quantified and recorded. KSS score with 2 years follow-up was evaluated.

Results

Significant differences in stability through the ROM were achieved between A and B. Group B showed AKSS which in comparison with A was not significantly higher at all follow-up examinations.

Discussion & Conclusion

Quantitative ligament balancing leads to better stability as a major factor for successful TKR. Classical score rating does not show a significant difference between the two techniques. In the future, better criteria needs to be found in order to define the appropriate TKR stability for individual patients.