Purpose: This study focused on analyzing the contact pressure and area on different patellar component designs in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to evaluate biomechanics related to the patellofemoral (PF) joint. Materials and Methods: The patellar components studied included the dome design, modified dome design, and anatomical design implants. Using finite element analysis and mechanical testing, the pressure and area were evaluated. The first loading condition was simulated at flexion angles of 0°, 15°, 45°, 90°, 120°, and 150°. The second loading condition was simulated for a clinically relevant scenario, involving a 2-mm medial shift at a flexion angle of 45°. Results: For both the modified dome and anatomical designs, the contact area and pressure increased with the flexion angle. The dome design reached its maximum contact area at a flexion angle of 120°. Among the designs, the anatomical design had the largest contact area and a lower contact pressure compared to the dome and modified dome designs. However, when a medial shift of 2 mm was simulated at a 45° flexion angle, which can occur clinically, the anatomical design showed edge contact, leading to higher contact pressure and reduced contact area. In contrast, the modified dome design demonstrated the lowest contact pressure and the greatest contact area under the same shifted conditions. Conclusion These findings suggest that the design of the patellar component significantly affects patellar biomechanics and stability. Specifically, the modified dome design showed improved biomechanical effects in clinically relevant scenarios. Therefore, patellar components with a modified dome design are expected to better manage PF joint pain and reduce complications in TKA.

Purpose: This study focused on analyzing the contact pressure and area on different patellar component designs in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to evaluate biomechanics related to the patellofemoral (PF) joint. Materials and Methods: The patellar components studied included the dome design, modified dome design, and anatomical design implants. Using finite element analysis and mechanical testing, the pressure and area were evaluated. The first loading condition was simulated at flexion angles of 0°, 15°, 45°, 90°, 120°, and 150°. The second loading condition was simulated for a clinically relevant scenario, involving a 2-mm medial shift at a flexion angle of 45°. Results: For both the modified dome and anatomical designs, the contact area and pressure increased with the flexion angle. The dome design reached its maximum contact area at a flexion angle of 120°. Among the designs, the anatomical design had the largest contact area and a lower contact pressure compared to the dome and modified dome designs. However, when a medial shift of 2 mm was simulated at a 45° flexion angle, which can occur clinically, the anatomical design showed edge contact, leading to higher contact pressure and reduced contact area. In contrast, the modified dome design demonstrated the lowest contact pressure and the greatest contact area under the same shifted conditions. Conclusion These findings suggest that the design of the patellar component significantly affects patellar biomechanics and stability. Specifically, the modified dome design showed improved biomechanical effects in clinically relevant scenarios. Therefore, patellar components with a modified dome design are expected to better manage PF joint pain and reduce complications in TKA.

Purpose: This study focused on analyzing the contact pressure and area on different patellar component designs in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to evaluate biomechanics related to the patellofemoral (PF) joint. Materials and Methods: The patellar components studied included the dome design, modified dome design, and anatomical design implants. Using finite element analysis and mechanical testing, the pressure and area were evaluated. The first loading condition was simulated at flexion angles of 0°, 15°, 45°, 90°, 120°, and 150°. The second loading condition was simulated for a clinically relevant scenario, involving a 2-mm medial shift at a flexion angle of 45°. Results: For both the modified dome and anatomical designs, the contact area and pressure increased with the flexion angle. The dome design reached its maximum contact area at a flexion angle of 120°. Among the designs, the anatomical design had the largest contact area and a lower contact pressure compared to the dome and modified dome designs. However, when a medial shift of 2 mm was simulated at a 45° flexion angle, which can occur clinically, the anatomical design showed edge contact, leading to higher contact pressure and reduced contact area. In contrast, the modified dome design demonstrated the lowest contact pressure and the greatest contact area under the same shifted conditions. Conclusion These findings suggest that the design of the patellar component significantly affects patellar biomechanics and stability. Specifically, the modified dome design showed improved biomechanical effects in clinically relevant scenarios. Therefore, patellar components with a modified dome design are expected to better manage PF joint pain and reduce complications in TKA.

Purpose: This study focused on analyzing the contact pressure and area on different patellar component designs in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to evaluate biomechanics related to the patellofemoral (PF) joint. Materials and Methods: The patellar components studied included the dome design, modified dome design, and anatomical design implants. Using finite element analysis and mechanical testing, the pressure and area were evaluated. The first loading condition was simulated at flexion angles of 0°, 15°, 45°, 90°, 120°, and 150°. The second loading condition was simulated for a clinically relevant scenario, involving a 2-mm medial shift at a flexion angle of 45°. Results: For both the modified dome and anatomical designs, the contact area and pressure increased with the flexion angle. The dome design reached its maximum contact area at a flexion angle of 120°. Among the designs, the anatomical design had the largest contact area and a lower contact pressure compared to the dome and modified dome designs. However, when a medial shift of 2 mm was simulated at a 45° flexion angle, which can occur clinically, the anatomical design showed edge contact, leading to higher contact pressure and reduced contact area. In contrast, the modified dome design demonstrated the lowest contact pressure and the greatest contact area under the same shifted conditions. Conclusion These findings suggest that the design of the patellar component significantly affects patellar biomechanics and stability. Specifically, the modified dome design showed improved biomechanical effects in clinically relevant scenarios. Therefore, patellar components with a modified dome design are expected to better manage PF joint pain and reduce complications in TKA.

Purpose: This study focused on analyzing the contact pressure and area on different patellar component designs in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to evaluate biomechanics related to the patellofemoral (PF) joint. Materials and Methods: The patellar components studied included the dome design, modified dome design, and anatomical design implants. Using finite element analysis and mechanical testing, the pressure and area were evaluated. The first loading condition was simulated at flexion angles of 0°, 15°, 45°, 90°, 120°, and 150°. The second loading condition was simulated for a clinically relevant scenario, involving a 2-mm medial shift at a flexion angle of 45°. Results: For both the modified dome and anatomical designs, the contact area and pressure increased with the flexion angle. The dome design reached its maximum contact area at a flexion angle of 120°. Among the designs, the anatomical design had the largest contact area and a lower contact pressure compared to the dome and modified dome designs. However, when a medial shift of 2 mm was simulated at a 45° flexion angle, which can occur clinically, the anatomical design showed edge contact, leading to higher contact pressure and reduced contact area. In contrast, the modified dome design demonstrated the lowest contact pressure and the greatest contact area under the same shifted conditions. Conclusion These findings suggest that the design of the patellar component significantly affects patellar biomechanics and stability. Specifically, the modified dome design showed improved biomechanical effects in clinically relevant scenarios. Therefore, patellar components with a modified dome design are expected to better manage PF joint pain and reduce complications in TKA.

Objective: This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone (160 mg/day) compared to quetiapine XR (QXR; 600 mg/day) in the treatment of acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone 160 mg/day (n=105) or QXR 600 mg/day (n=105). Primary efficacy measure was the change from baseline to week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score. Adverse events, body measurements, and laboratory parameters were assessed. Results: Lurasidone demonstrated non-inferiority to QXR on the PANSS total score. Adjusted mean±standard error change at week 6 on the PANSS total score was -26.42±2.02 and -27.33±2.01 in the lurasidone and QXR group, respectively. The mean difference score was -0.91 (95% confidence interval -6.35–4.53). The lurasidone group showed a greater reduction in PANSS total and negative subscale on week 1 and a greater reduction in end-point CGI-S score compared to the QXR group. Body weight, body mass index, and waist circumference in the lurasidone group were reduced, with significantly lower mean change compared to QXR. Endpoint changes in glucose, cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein levels were also significantly lower. The most common adverse drug reactions with lurasidone were akathisia and nausea. Conclusion Lurasidone 160 mg/day was found to be non-inferior to QXR 600 mg/day in the treatment of schizophrenia with comparable efficacy and tolerability. Adverse effects of lurasidone were generally tolerable, and beneficial effects on metabolic parameters can be expected.