Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025
Preserving the native knee joint line obliquity in total knee arthroplasty benefits ankle movement during the five times sit-to-stand test.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Li Zhijun, de Grave Philip Winnock, Criekinge Tamaya Van, Luyckx Thomas, Claeys Kurt
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) alignment strategies affect lower limb biomechanics during functional activities. This study assessed sit-to-stand performance between individuals who underwent TKA with inverse kinematic alignment (iKA), adjusted mechanical alignment (aMA).
METHODS: The iKA and aMA groups were compared to a healthy control group in their performance of the five times sit-to-stand (5xSTS) task. Phase-specific timing and joint angles were analysed using statistical parametric mapping (SPM) and conventional metrics.
RESULTS: This study included a 2-year follow-up after TKA, with a minimum follow-up of 21.50 ± 5.20 months. Each group had 15 participants. The iKA group (72.52 ± 5.50 years) was older than the aMA group (66.10 ± 8.22 years; p = 0.036). The aMA group demonstrated a significantly shorter sit-down phase compared to healthy controls (9.48 ± 0.72% vs. 10.80 ± 1.33%; p = 0.003). Additionally, the aMA group (15.92 ± 7.47°) exhibited approximately 7° less ankle range of motion (ROM) during the stand-up phase compared to both the iKA group (22.83 ± 6.90°; p = 0.027) and healthy controls (23.61 ± 6.76°; p = 0.013). During the sit-down phase, the aMA group displayed a significantly reduced average ankle ROM (14.05 ± 7.89°) compared to healthy controls (19.73 ± 5.34°; p = 0.036). The SPM analysis revealed no significant differences in ankle or knee flexion angles across the groups during the entire 5xSTS task.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the ankle ROM is influenced following TKA during the 5xSTS task, suggesting that alignment strategies may have biomechanical effects extending beyond the knee joint. A deeper understanding of these effects could inform rehabilitation strategies and optimise surgical outcomes following TKA.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
METHODS: The iKA and aMA groups were compared to a healthy control group in their performance of the five times sit-to-stand (5xSTS) task. Phase-specific timing and joint angles were analysed using statistical parametric mapping (SPM) and conventional metrics.
RESULTS: This study included a 2-year follow-up after TKA, with a minimum follow-up of 21.50 ± 5.20 months. Each group had 15 participants. The iKA group (72.52 ± 5.50 years) was older than the aMA group (66.10 ± 8.22 years; p = 0.036). The aMA group demonstrated a significantly shorter sit-down phase compared to healthy controls (9.48 ± 0.72% vs. 10.80 ± 1.33%; p = 0.003). Additionally, the aMA group (15.92 ± 7.47°) exhibited approximately 7° less ankle range of motion (ROM) during the stand-up phase compared to both the iKA group (22.83 ± 6.90°; p = 0.027) and healthy controls (23.61 ± 6.76°; p = 0.013). During the sit-down phase, the aMA group displayed a significantly reduced average ankle ROM (14.05 ± 7.89°) compared to healthy controls (19.73 ± 5.34°; p = 0.036). The SPM analysis revealed no significant differences in ankle or knee flexion angles across the groups during the entire 5xSTS task.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the ankle ROM is influenced following TKA during the 5xSTS task, suggesting that alignment strategies may have biomechanical effects extending beyond the knee joint. A deeper understanding of these effects could inform rehabilitation strategies and optimise surgical outcomes following TKA.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.