• 01865 307 528
  • 07889 443721
  • christine@oxfordorthopaedics.net
  • Manor Hospital, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7RP
  • Home
  • Reference Book
      • Unicompartmental Arthroplasty with the Oxford Knee
      • Preface
      • Chapter 1: Introduction and Historical Overview
      • Chapter 2: Design and Biomechanics of the Oxford Knee
      • Chapter 3: Mobility and Stability of the Intact and Replaced Knee
      • Chapter 4; Indications: Anteromedial Osteoarthritis
      • Chapter 5: Contraindications in Anteromedial Osteoarthritis
      • Chapter 6: Principles of the Oxford Operation
      • Chapter 7: Surgical technique: Cemented or cementless implantation with Microplasty instrumentation
      • Chapter 8: Medial Indications other than AMOA
      • Chapter 9: Postoperative Management and Radiography
      • Chapter 10: Clinical Results
      • Chapter 11: Management of Complications
      • Chapter 12: The Lateral Side
      • Appendix
  • Publications
  • Patient’s Area
  • Meet the Team
    • David_MurrayDavid Murray
    • Chris-Dodd2Christopher Dodd
    • John-O’ConnorJohn O’Connor
    • John GoodfellowJohn Goodfellow
    • Oxford-Knee-Fellows23Knee Fellows & Engineers
  • Contact
  • Home
  • Reference Book
    • Unicompartmental Arthroplasty with the Oxford Knee
    • Preface
    • Chapter 1: Introduction and Historical Overview
    • Chapter 2: Design and Biomechanics of the Oxford Knee
    • Chapter 3: Mobility and Stability of the Intact and Replaced Knee
    • Chapter 4; Indications: Anteromedial Osteoarthritis
    • Chapter 5: Contraindications in Anteromedial Osteoarthritis
    • Chapter 6: Principles of the Oxford Operation
    • Chapter 7: Surgical technique: Cemented or cementless implantation with Microplasty instrumentation
    • Chapter 8: Medial Indications other than AMOA
    • Chapter 9: Postoperative Management and Radiography
    • Chapter 10: Clinical Results
    • Chapter 11: Management of Complications
    • Chapter 12: The Lateral Side
    • Appendix
  • Publications
  • Patient’s Area
  • Meet the Team
    • David Murray
    • Christopher Dodd
    • John O’Connor
    • John Goodfellow
    • Knee Fellows & Engineers
  • Contact
Expand All Collapse All
  • 9: Postoperative Management and Radiography
    • Intraoperative local anaesthesia
    • Blood loss
    • Rehabilitation
    • Postoperative radiology
    • Tibial component
    • Femoral component
    • Impingement
    • Radiolucent lines
    • Cementless OUKA
    • References

Femoral component

51 views 0

On the anteroposterior projection, the femoral component usually has the appearance of a ‘bucket seat’ (Fig. 9.6), with the component internally rotated relative to the tibia. The explanation for this results from the obligatory ‘screw home’ mechanism of the knee in extension. The components are implanted in a neutral position relative to each other in flexion. The radiograph is taken in extension. With extension there is internal rotation of the femur (see Figs. 3.2 – 3.4) and thus of the femoral component relative to the tibial component. The femoral component should be parallel to the mechanical axis, but ±10° of varus/valgus positioning is acceptable (see Fig. 6.15).

Figure 9.6 See text for details

On the lateral projection, the fixation peg should be flexed to the long axis of the femur (Fig. 9.7). With the introduction of a two peg femur and the microplasty technique, we aim for the femoral component to be flexed by 10° (±10°) to the femoral axis.

Figure 9.7 Femoral component flexed relative to the femoral axis.

The bone/implant interfaces of the femoral component are not as readily seen as those of the tibial implant. The inner surface of the inferior facet of the femoral component is concave, so that interface is hidden by the metal. The only interface that is readily imaged is at the flat posterior facet. If the radiographic technique has resulted in a true lateral silhouette, that interface is visible. It should present a thin parallel-sided layer of cement, with shallow penetration of the dense femoral bone. The central peg of the implant should appear solidly cemented in the drill hole.

Meniscal bearing

On the anteroposterior projection, the mediolateral position of the bearing on the tibial plateau is deduced from the position of the radio-opaque markers. In the current bearings, there is a line across the front and two small balls at the back corners (Fig. 9.6). The bearing should lie with its lateral edge 2–3 mm away from the vertical wall of the tibial implant. Its position is explained by remembering that the bearing was positioned 1 mm from the wall with the knee flexed. The radiograph is taken with the knee extended, and extension causes the bearing to glide not only forward on the plateau but also medially, away from the wall (Chapter 6, Fig. 6.17).

Next >>

Was this helpful?

Yes  No
Related Articles
  • References
  • Cementless OUKA
  • Radiolucent lines
  • Impingement
  • Tibial component
  • Postoperative radiology
The Oxford Knee Replacement is the most widely used partial knee replacement worldwide. Replacing one side of the knee, unicompartmental knee replacement, tends to result in shorter hospital stays, fewer short-term complications, faster recovery and better knee function than total knee replacements.

© All rights reserved Oxford Knee Info 2025

.

Privacy Policy

Popular Search:ACL damage, physical signs