Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 13, 2025
In Vitro Application of a Wireless Sensor in Flexion-Extension Gap Balance of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty
Published on: May 5, 2023
Does referencing system affect the selection of implant size, position and gap balance in total knee arthroplasty?
Jade Pei Yuik Ho1, Joon Hee Cho2, Hee Seung Nam2
1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, South Korea; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kuala Lumpur General Hospital, Malaysia.
Background:
(1) To evaluate if referencing system affects selection of implant size, position, and gap balance in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with the use of contemporary implant designs and (2) to describe the authors' intraoperative sizing strategy using anterior referencing (AR) and posterior referencing (PR) systems.
Methods:
This was a retrospective review of 270 consecutive patients (397 knees) who underwent primary TKA with an AR or PR system. Selection of implant size, mediolateral and anteroposterior alignment of the femoral component, as well as gaps were compared between groups.
Results:
In the AR group, more patients had femoral components which were upsized or downsized compared to those in the PR group (29.5% vs 12.0% respectively) and in patients who underwent bilateral TKA, 49.4% of those in the AR group had femur component size asymmetry. The AR group had better medio-lateral (ML) fit over the distal cutting surface area, smaller change in anterior offset but higher incidence of anterior notching when compared to the PR group. Posterior condylar offset (PCO) was restored in both groups and gap differences in flexion-extension and ML were comparable. There was also no difference in clinical scores and ROM between groups at 2-years follow-up.
Conclusion:
In this study, conventional implications related to referencing system were not observed. In practice, AR systems can restore PCO while PR systems do not result in increased anterior notching or anterior overstuffing. Differences observed in this study are most likely related to implant design specifics and surgical technique.
