Which is better? Anterior or posterior referencing for femoral component position in total knee arthroplasty

Sho Nojiri, Kazue Hayakawa, Hideki Date, Yasushi Naito, Keigo Sato, Yuki Uraya, Nobuyuki Fujita

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

When sizing the femoral component or determining its placement in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), if the anterior–posterior diameter of the femoral condyle is between component sizes, the selected size will differ depending on whether anterior referencing (AR) or posterior referencing (PR) is used. As a result, the amount of resected bone will also vary. In the present prospective study, we compared the two referencing methods to determine which is more suitable for individual patients. We recruited 58 patients (92 joints) who received TKA using the standard technique with intermediate-size components. AR was used in 26 joints, and PR in 23 joints. Seventeen of the patients underwent same-day bilateral TKA in which components of different sizes were used for the left and right joints. AR resulted in significantly smaller anterior and posterior offsets than PR. Preoperative clinical evaluation revealed no significant differences among cases in which intermediate-size components were indicated, or those in which components of different sizes were indicated. When an intermediate-sized component was indicated using the AR method, moving the sizer forward resulted in a larger posterior gap, but this technique was nevertheless considered acceptable. AR is likely to be more suitable than PR as it achieves more physiological anterior clearance.

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Orthopaedic Surgery
Volume29
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2021

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Which is better? Anterior or posterior referencing for femoral component position in total knee arthroplasty'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this