Biomechanical Study of Patellar Component Fixation with Varying Degrees of Bone Loss

Management of Bone Loss in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: An International Consensus Symposium

The evaluation, classification, and treatment of significant bone loss after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) continue to be a complex and debated topic in revision TKA (rTKA). Despite the introduction of new evidence and innovative technologies aimed at addressing the approach and care of severe bone loss in rTKA, there is no single document that systematically incorporates these newer surgical approaches. Therefore, a comprehensive review of the treatment of severe bone loss in rTKA is necessary. The Stavros Niarchos Foundation Complex Joint Reconstruction Center Hospital for Special Surgery, dedicated to clinical care and research primarily in revision hip and knee replacement, convened a Management of Bone Loss in Revision TKA symposium on June 24, 2022. At this meeting, the 42 international invited experts were divided into groups; each group was assigned to discuss questions related to 1 of the 4 topics: (1) assessing preoperative workup and imaging, anticipated bone loss, classification system, and implant surveillance; (2) achieving durable fixation in the setting of significant bone loss in revision TKA; (3) managing patellar bone loss and the extensor mechanism in cases of severe bone loss; and (4) considering the use of complex modular replacement systems: hinges, distal femoral, and proximal tibial replacements. Each group came to consensus, when possible, based on an extensive literature review and interactive discussion on their group topic. This document reviews each these 4 areas, the consensus of each group, and directions for future research.

Significantly Worse Fixation of Cemented Patellar Components on Multiacquisition Variable-Resonance Image Combination Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compared to Femoral and Tibial Components: A Cause for Concern?

BACKGROUND

The etiology of anterior knee pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains unclear. Few studies have examined patellar fixation quality. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the patellar cement-bone interface after TKA on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to correlate the patella fixation grade with the incidence of anterior knee pain.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 279 knees undergoing metal artifact reduction MRI for either anterior or generalized knee pain at least 6 months after cemented, posterior-stabilized TKA with patellar resurfacing with one implant manufacturer. MRI cement-bone interfaces and percent-integration of the patella, femur, and tibia were assessed by a fellowship-trained senior musculoskeletal radiologist. The grade and character of the patella interface were compared to the femur and tibia. Regression analyses were used to determine the association between patella integration with anterior knee pain.

RESULTS

There were more patellar components with ≥75% zones of fibrous tissue (50%) compared to the femur (18%) or tibia (5%) (P < .001). There were a greater number of patellar implants with poor cement integration (18%) compared to the femur (1%) or tibia (1%) (P < .001). MRI findings showed more evidence of patellar component loosening (8%) compared to the femur (1%) or tibia (1%) (P < .001). Anterior knee pain was correlated with worse patella cement integration (P = .01), with women predicted to have better integration (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The quality of the patellar cement-bone interface after TKA is worse compared to the femoral or tibial component interface. Poor patellar cement-bone interface may be a source of anterior knee pain after TKA, but further investigation is required.

Patella Strength Characteristics in Cemented vs Press-fit Implants: A Biomechanical Analysis of Initial Stability

Background

Patellar resurfacing is routinely performed during total knee arthroplasty to reduce pain associated with patellofemoral osteoarthritis. With 3-dimensional ingrowth materials readily available, the present study aimed to evaluate if cemented polyethylene (CP) patellar buttons conferred higher ultimate load to failure than press-fit metal-backed (PF) buttons in axial compression.

Material and methods

Ten matched cadaveric and 20 composite patellae were resurfaced and implanted with either a PF or CP button. Biomechanical testing using an MTS machine was performed to measure the force required to generate a periprosthetic patella fracture. Mean load to failure and load to failure per 1-mm patellar thickness were compared with a paired and independent samples Students’ t-test for the cadaveric and composite patellae, respectively.

Results

The average load to failure for the matched cadaveric patellae with PF implants was significantly lower than that for patellae with CP buttons (4082.05 N vs 5898.37 N, P = .045). The average load to failure for composite patella with PF implants was significantly higher than that for composite patellae with CP implants (6004.09 N vs 4551.40 N, P = .001). The mean load to failure per 1-mm patellar thickness was also significantly higher for composite patellae with PF implants (263.80 N/mm vs 200.37 N/mm, P = .001).

Conclusion

Cadaveric patellae with cemented implants had a significantly higher ultimate load to failure in axial compression than press-fit patella. However, this result was reversed in the composite model. Exploration of biological and composite model properties could provide further insight into patellar implant selection during total knee arthroplasty.

Fracture Risk With Patella Resurfacing During Total Knee Arthroplasty After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Bone-Patella-Bone Autograft: A Biomechanical Analysis

Background

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears are common injuries. Ipsilateral bone patellar tendon bone (BPTB) autograft has been frequently used for ACL reconstructions. A large percentage of patients who sustain ACL ruptures develop early osteoarthritis and require total knee arthroplasty (TKA). When patients with previous BPTB autograft for an ACL tear undergo TKA, there may be an increased risk of fracture after patellar resurfacing.

Methods

There were 20 artificial Sawbones and 10 cadaveric patellae resurfaced. To simulate the presence of a previous BPTB autograft, a bone plug was removed from the anterior surface of the patellae and was resurfaced with a cemented patellar button. Biomechanical testing was performed to determine the compressive load to fracture of patellae with and without previous BPTB autograft.

Results

The average maximum load to failure for the artificial Sawbones patellae without a previous BPTB autograft was 4551.40 N ± 753.12 compared with 2855.39 N ± 531.46 with a previous BPTB autograft (P < .001). The average maximum load to failure for the cadaveric patellae without a previous BPTB autograft was 7256.37 N ± 1473.97 compared with 5232.22 N ± 475.04 with a previous BPTB autograft (P = .021).

Conclusions

The results demonstrate a significantly lower maximum load to failure of a resurfaced patella in the presence of a previous BPTB autograft. This can be used to aid in the decision of whether to resurface the patellae in these patients and to educate patients that the presence of a previous BPTB autograft may be an increased risk factor for patella fracture after TKA.