Abstract
Introduction
Malalignment of total knee arthroplasty components may affect implant function and lead to decreased survival, regardless of preferred alignment philosophy – neural mechanical axis restoration or kinematic alignment. A common technique is to set coronal alignment prior to adjusting slope. If the guide is not maintained in a neutral position, adjustment of the slope may alter coronal alignment. Different implant systems recommend varying degrees of slope for ideal function of the implant, from 0–7°. The purpose of this study was to quantify the change in coronal alignment with increasing posterior tibial slope comparing two methods of jig fixation.
Methods
Prospective consecutive series of 100 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty using computer navigation. First cohort of 50 patients had extramedullary cutting jig secured distally with ankle clamp and proximally with one pin and a second cohort of 50 patients with the jig secured distally with ankle clamp and proximally with two pins. The change in coronal alignment was recorded with each degree of increasing posterior slope from 0–7° using computer navigation. Mean coronal alignment and change in coronal alignment was compared between the two cohorts.
Results
Utilizing one pin to secure the jig, all osteotomies drifted into increased varus with an average coronal alignment of 2.38° varus (range 0.5–4.5°varus) at 7° posterior slope with an average change of 0.34° in coronal alignment per degree increase of posterior slope. Utilizing two pins to secure the jig showed a propensity to drift into valgus with an average coronal alignment of 0.22° valgus (range 1.0° varus − 1.5° valgus) at 7° posterior slope with an average change of 0.04° in coronal alignment per degree increase of posterior slope. The observed changes in coronal alignment between the two cohorts of patients were significantly different at all recorded levels of posterior slope.
Conclusion
In this study, when one pin is utilized to secure the jig increasing posterior slope resulted in varus alignment with 12.0% of patients having greater than a 3 degree increase in varus at 7 degrees posterior slope compared to zero subjects in the group where the jig was secured with two pins. In the single pin group patients started to fall outside of the ±3° safe zone for coronal alignment at 4° of posterior slope. There were no patients in the two-pin cohort that fell outside of the ±3° safe zone for coronal alignment. Excessive varus alignment may result in decreased survivorship when using extramedullary jig attached distally with ankle clamp distally and proximally with one pin. Use of more than one pin and computer navigation are beneficial to prevent deviation from desired coronal alignment in systems with increased posterior slope. Verification of tibial cut intra-op is critical, especially if using one pin fixation with extramedullary jig. The observed relationship may help to explain why alignment of TKA is more accurate with computer navigation and new mid-term studies are demonstrating superior survivorship and outcomes in patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty with computer navigation, in certain cohorts of patients especially < 65 years.
