F.-Y. Ho
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
F.-Y. Ho has a total of 5 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
C.-H. Huang
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery
1 shared publicationC.-Y. Huang
Biomechanics Laboratory Mackay Memorial Hospital, 92 Sec.Z, Chung-Shan N. Road, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
1 shared publicationH.-M. Ma
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mackay Memorial Hospital, 92 Sec.Z, Chung-Shan N. Road, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
1 shared publicationT.-G. Kwok
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery
1 shared publicationY.-C. Lu
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 1 March 2007
- Published by British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume
- Vol. 89-B (3) , 408-412
The effect of the design of the femoral component on the conformity of the patellofemoral joint in total knee replacement
One of the most controversial issues in total knee replacement is whether or not to resurface the patella. In order to determine the effects of different designs of femoral component on the conformity of the patellofemoral joint, five different knee prostheses were investigated. These were Low Contact Stress, the Miller-Galante II, the NexGen, the Porous-Coated Anatomic, and the Total Condylar prostheses. Three-dimensional models of the prostheses and a native patella were developed and assessed by computer. The conformity of the curvature of the five different prosthetic femoral components to their corresponding patellar implants and to the native patella at different angles of flexion was assessed by measuring the angles of intersection of tangential lines. The Total Condylar prosthesis had the lowest conformity with the native patella (mean 8.58°; 0.14° to 29.9°) and with its own patellar component (mean 11.36°; 0.55° to 39.19°). In the other four prostheses, the conformity was better (mean 2.25°; 0.02° to 10.52°) when articulated with the corresponding patellar component. The Porous-Coated Anatomic femoral component showed better conformity (mean 6.51°; 0.07° to 9.89°) than the Miller-Galante II prosthesis (mean 11.20°; 5.80° to 16.72°) when tested with the native patella. Although the Nexgen prosthesis had less conformity with the native patella at a low angle of flexion, this improved at mid (mean 3.57°; 1.40° to 4.56°) or high angles of flexion (mean 4.54°; 0.91° to 9.39°), respectively. The Low Contact Stress femoral component had the best conformity with the native patella (mean 2.39°; 0.04° to 4.56°). There was no significant difference (p > 0.208) between the conformity when tested with the native patella or its own patellar component at any angle of flexion. The geometry of the anterior flange of a femoral component affects the conformity of the patellofemoral joint when articulating with the native patella. A more anatomical design of femoral component is preferable if the surgeon decides not to resurface the patella at the time of operation.
- 1 March 2007
- Published by British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume
- Vol. 89-B (3) , 408-412
Open AccessThe effect of the design of the femoral component on the conformity of the patellofemoral joint in total knee replacement
One of the most controversial issues in total knee replacement is whether or not to resurface the patella. In order to determine the effects of different designs of femoral component on the conformity of the patellofemoral joint, five different knee prostheses were investigated. These were Low Contact Stress, the Miller-Galante II, the NexGen, the Porous-Coated Anatomic, and the Total Condylar prostheses. Three-dimensional models of the prostheses and a native patella were developed and assessed by computer. The conformity of the curvature of the five different prosthetic femoral components to their corresponding patellar implants and to the native patella at different angles of flexion was assessed by measuring the angles of intersection of tangential lines. The Total Condylar prosthesis had the lowest conformity with the native patella (mean 8.58°; 0.14° to 29.9°) and with its own patellar component (mean 11.36°; 0.55° to 39.19°). In the other four prostheses, the conformity was better (mean 2.25°; 0.02° to 10.52°) when articulated with the corresponding patellar component. The Porous-Coated Anatomic femoral component showed better conformity (mean 6.51°; 0.07° to 9.89°) than the Miller-Galante II prosthesis (mean 11.20°; 5.80° to 16.72°) when tested with the native patella. Although the Nexgen prosthesis had less conformity with the native patella at a low angle of flexion, this improved at mid (mean 3.57°; 1.40° to 4.56°) or high angles of flexion (mean 4.54°; 0.91° to 9.39°), respectively. The Low Contact Stress femoral component had the best conformity with the native patella (mean 2.39°; 0.04° to 4.56°). There was no significant difference (p > 0.208) between the conformity when tested with the native patella or its own patellar component at any angle of flexion. The geometry of the anterior flange of a femoral component affects the conformity of the patellofemoral joint when articulating with the native patella. A more anatomical design of femoral component is preferable if the surgeon decides not to resurface the patella at the time of operation.