The Knee
Volume 17, Issue 5 , Pages 350-355 , October 2010

Effect of femoral to tibial varus mismatch on the contact area of unicondylar knee prostheses

Received 30 May 2009 ,Revised 9 October 2009 ,Accepted 9 October 2009.

References 

  1. Ashraf T, Newman JH, Desai VV, Beard D, Nevelos JE. Polyethylene wear in a non-congruous unicompartmental knee replacement: a retrieval analysis. Knee. 2004;11:177–181
  2. Bachus KN, DeMarco AL, Judd KT, Horwitz DS, Brodke DS. Measuring contact area, force, and pressure for bioengineering applications: using Fuji Film and TekScan systems. Med Eng Phys. 2006;28:483–488
  3. Beard DJ, Pandit H, Gill HS, Hollinghurst D, Dodd CA, Murray DW. The influence of the presence and severity of pre-existing patellofemoral degenerative changes on the outcome of the Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Jt Surg Br Vol. 2007;89:1597–1601
  4. Blunn GW, Joshi AB, Minns RJ, Lidgren L, Lilley P, Ryd L, et al. Wear in retrieved condylar knee arthroplasties. A comparison of wear in different designs of 280 retrieved condylar knee prostheses. J Arthroplast. 1997;12:281–290
  5. Cheng CK, Huang CH, Liau JJ. The influence of surgical malalignment on the contact pressures of fixed and mobile bearing knee prostheses — a biomechanical study. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2003;18:231–236
  6. Collier MB, Eickmann TH, Sukezaki F, McAuley JP, Eng GA. Patient, implant, and alignment factors associated with revision of medial compartment unicondylar arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2006;21:108–115
  7. Collier MB, Engh CA, McAuley JP, Engh GA. Factors associated with the loss of thickness of polyethylene tibial bearings after knee arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am Vol. 2007;89:1306–1314
  8. Eickmann TH, Collier MB, Sukezaki F, McAuley JP, Engh GA. Survival of medial unicondylar arthroplasties placed by one surgeon 1984–1998. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;452:143–149
  9. Harris ML, Morberg P, Bruce WJ, Walsh WR. An improved method for measuring tibiofemoral contact areas in total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of K-scan sensor and Fuji film. J Biomech. 1999;32:951–958
  10. Hernigou P, Deschamps G. Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;161–165
  11. Ostermeier S, Nowakowski A, Stukenborg-Colsman C. Dynamic in vitro measurement of pressure and movement with the LCS prosthetic system. Orthopade. 2003;32:292–295
  12. Rostoker W, Galante JO. Contact pressure dependence of wear rates of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene. J Biomed Mater Res. 1979;13:957–964
  13. Sathasivam S, Walker PS, Campbell PA, Rayner K. The effect of contact area on wear in relation to fixed bearing and mobile bearing knee replacements. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001;58:282–290
  14. Villa T, Migliavacca F, Gastaldi D, Colombo M, Pietrabissa R. Contact stresses and fatigue life in a knee prosthesis: comparison between in vitro measurements and computational simulations. J Biomech. 2004;37:45–53
  15. Wasielewski RC, Galante JO, Leighty RM, Natarajan RN, Rosenberg AG. Wear patterns on retrieved polyethylene tibial inserts and their relationship to technical considerations during total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;31–43
  16. Cabral CWLF, Silva FA, Silva WAB, Landulpho AB, Silva LB. Comparison between two methods to record occlusal contacts in habitual maximal intercuspation. Braz J Oral Sci. 2006;19:1239–1243

PII: S0968-0160(09)00205-1

doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2009.10.004

The Knee
Volume 17, Issue 5 , Pages 350-355 , October 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution