It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Purpose
The objective of the present study was to acquire and compare by the use of a navigation system the intra-operative flexion-extension movement of the knee performed actively by the patient and passively by the surgeon before and after a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) implantation.
Methods
A cohort of 31 patients with primary knee osteoarthritis (OA), candidate for TKA underwent intra-operative kinematics assessment with a commercial navigation system before and after the definitive implant positioning of a Cruciate Retaining (CR) Mobile Bearing (MB) prostheses. The kinematical data were acquired while surgeon performed the flexion-extension movement (passive ROM - pROM), and while the patient performed it (active ROM - aROM). Differences between pre- and post- implantation and between active and passive motions, were statistically analyzed using paired Student t-tests (p = 0.05).
Results
No statistically significant difference were found between aROM and pROM with paired Student t-test regarding internal-external rotation and anterior-posterior translation of the femoral component with respect to the tibia during flexion-extension movement before and after TKA implant (p > 0.05).
Conclusions
Active muscle contraction seems to not significantly affect TKA kinematics. The ROM performed by the surgeon during operation resemble the movement actively performed by the patient.
The clinical relevance of this study further supports the use of CAS system in performing intra-operative analysis concerning knee biomechanics.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, II Clinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica, IRCCS, Bologna, Italy (GRID:grid.419038.7) (ISNI:0000 0001 2154 6641)
2 Università degli Studi di Brescia, Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’Informazione, Brescia, Italy (GRID:grid.7637.5) (ISNI:0000000417571846)
3 Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Milan, Italy (GRID:grid.417728.f) (ISNI:0000 0004 1756 8807)
4 Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Laboratorio di Biomeccanica, Bologna, Italy (GRID:grid.419038.7) (ISNI:0000 0001 2154 6641)
5 Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, II Clinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica, IRCCS, Bologna, Italy (GRID:grid.419038.7) (ISNI:0000 0001 2154 6641); Università di Bologna, Dipartimento Scienze Biomediche e Neuromotorie-DIBINEM, Bologna, Italy (GRID:grid.6292.f) (ISNI:0000 0004 1757 1758)