Patellofemoral arthroplasties are desirable when treating isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis, due to preservation of the tibiofemoral joint. Since few studies report on new commercial patellofemoral prosthesis biomechanics, a musculoskeletal model enabling analysis of subject-specific knee biomechanics was used to compare four patellofemoral replacement systems (A, B, C, and D) to one another. The prostheses were implanted according to manufacturer guidelines, after which the knee flexed and extended under active muscle loading. An increased patellotrochlear index enabled early patella-trochlear groove engagement. The resurfaced patellae were stable in mediolateral shift and anteroposterior displacement, but only Prosthesis A and D provided a smooth transition between the distal prosthesis border and femoral cartilage. A reduction in the anteroposterior condylar distance displaced the patella posteriorly, resulting in reduced peri-patellar soft tissue tension but an increased patella tendon–quadriceps tendon ratio. The tibial tubercle–trochlear groove distance became pathologic in all replacements. The patella will be stable irrespective of the prosthesis used, but Prosthesis A and D seem to provide a better fit to the trochlear groove anatomy. The increased tibial tubercle–trochlear groove distance emphasizes the importance of extensor alignment in combination with the placement of the prosthesis: an increased Q-angle might lead to excessive lateral wear on the patella button. The extensor mechanism load will increase post-surgery based on the rise in the patella tendon–quadriceps tendon ratio which points to a reduced moment arm. This work provides insight into the dynamic biomechanical function and the design of current commercial patellofemoral replacement systems.
What Is the Risk of Repeat Revision When Patellofemoral Replacement Is Revised to TKA? An Analysis of 482 Cases From a Large National Arthroplasty Registry
