The Journal of Arthroplasty
Volume 27, Issue 2 , Pages 260-265, February 2012

Lateral Laxity in Flexion Increases the Postoperative Flexion Angle in Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty

Received 17 December 2010; accepted 16 April 2011. published online 13 July 2011.

Abstract 

Thirty-eight patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis underwent 41 cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasties. In varus and valgus tests at flexion, subjects were seated on a table at 80° of knee flexion; 50 N was applied perpendicular to the lower leg. The factors affecting the postoperative flexion angle were investigated in a multiregression analysis. The mean joint angles of the flexion-valgus and flexion-varus tests were 3.4° ± 1.4° and 6.2° ± 2.5°, respectively. The flexion-varus angle was correlated with the postoperative flexion angle (P < .01). The mean postoperative flexion angles were 110.8° ± 9.6° and 118.1° ± 8.0° in the groups with the flexion-varus angle of 6° or less and more than 6°, respectively (P = .02). Slack lateral laxity in flexion had a significant effect during knee flexion in cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty.

Keywords: cruciate-retaining, total knee arthroplasty, flat-on-flat, postoperative flexion angle, lateral laxity, flexion stress test

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 The Conflict of Interest statement associated with this article can be found at doi:10.1016/j.arth.2011.04.025.

PII: S0883-5403(11)00209-9

doi:10.1016/j.arth.2011.04.025

The Journal of Arthroplasty
Volume 27, Issue 2 , Pages 260-265, February 2012