Comparison of the in vivo kinematics between robotic‐assisted Bi‐cruciate retaining and Bi‐cruciate stabilised total knee arthroplasty

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundUp to 20% of patients remain unsatisfied after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), prompting the development of new implants. Bi‐Cruciate Retaining (BCR) TKA preserves both the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL), with the ACL beneficial for its proprioceptive qualities. The Bi‐Cruciate Stabilised (BCS) TKA substitutes the ACL and PCL with a unique dual cam‐post mechanism. Robotics improve accuracy and facilitate technically demanding TKA.MethodsThis was a retrospective case‐control study recruited from two centres. Measured outcomes included kinematic analysis, proprioception, and functional outcomes.ResultsThere was a significantly larger maximum flexion angle and range of flexion to extension in sit‐to‐stand and stairs in BCR when compared to BCS. Further analysis revealed more similarities between BCR and normal native knees. Proprioception and functional scores did not have any statistical difference.ConclusionBCR TKA demonstrated better knee flexion in weight‐bearing active range of motion and showed similarities with normal knee kinematics.