Aims. This study aimed to evaluate if total knee arthroplasty (TKA) femoral components aligned in either mechanical alignment (MA) or kinematic alignment (KA) are more biomimetic concerning trochlear sulcus orientation and restoration of trochlear height. Methods. Bone surfaces from 1,012 CT scans of non-arthritic femora were segmented using a modelling and analytics system. TKA femoral components (Triathlon; Stryker) were virtually implanted in both MA and KA. Trochlear sulcus orientation was assessed by measuring the distal trochlear sulcus angle (DTSA) in native femora and in KA and MA prosthetic femoral components. Trochlear anatomy restoration was evaluated by measuring the differences in medial, lateral, and sulcus trochlear height between native femora and KA and MA prosthetic femoral components. Results. Femoral components in both MA and KA alignments exhibited a more valgus DTSA compared to native femora. However, DTSA deviation from native was significantly less in KA than in MA (4.8° (SD 2.2°) vs 8.8° (SD 1.8°); p < 0.001). DTSA deviation from native orientation correlated positively with the mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA) in KA and negatively in MA (r = 0.53, p < 0.001; r = -0.18, p < 0.001). Medial trochlear height was not restored with either MA or KA, with MA resulting in lower medial trochlear height than KA in the proximal 20% of the trochlea. Lateral and sulcus trochlear height was not restored with either alignment in the proximal 80% of the trochlea. At the terminal arc point, KA replicated sulcus and lateral trochlear height, while MA led to over-restoration. Conclusion. Femoral components aligned in KA demonstrated greater biomimetic qualities than those in MA regarding trochlear sulcus orientation and trochlear height restoration, particularly in valgus femora. Variability across knees was observed, warranting further research to evaluate the clinical implications of these findings. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(8):817–825

The cause of dissatisfaction following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains elusive. Much attention has been focused on static mechanical alignment as a basis for surgical success and optimising outcomes. More recently, research on both normal and osteoarthritic knees, as well as kinematically aligned TKAs, has suggested that other specific and dynamic factors may be more important than a generic target of 0 ± 3º of a neutral axis. Consideration of these other variables is necessary to understand ideal targets and move beyond generic results. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):81–3

Aims. Patient-specific instrumentation of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a technique permitting the targeting of individual kinematic alignment, but deviation from a neutral mechanical axis may have implications on implant fixation and therefore survivorship. The primary objective of this randomized controlled study was to compare the fixation of tibial components implanted with patient-specific instrumentation targeting kinematic alignment (KA+PSI) versus components placed using computer-assisted surgery targeting neutral mechanical alignment (MA+CAS). Tibial component migration measured by radiostereometric analysis was the primary outcome measure (compared longitudinally between groups and to published acceptable thresholds). Secondary outcome measures were inducible displacement after one year and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) over two years. The secondary objective was to assess the relationship between alignment and both tibial component migration and inducible displacement. Patients and Methods. A total of 47 patients due to undergo TKA were randomized to KA+PSI (n = 24) or MA+CAS (n = 23). In the KA+PSI group, there were 16 female and eight male patients with a mean age of 64 years (. sd. 8). In the MA+CAS group, there were 17 female and six male patients with a mean age of 63 years (. sd. 7). Surgery was performed using cemented, cruciate-retaining Triathlon total knees with patellar resurfacing, and patients were followed up for two years. The effect of alignment on tibial component migration and inducible displacement was analyzed irrespective of study group. Results. There was no difference over two years in longitudinal migration of the tibial component between the KA+PSI and MA+CAS groups (reaching median maximum total point motion migration at two years of 0.40 mm for the KA+PSI group and 0.37 mm for the MA+CAS group, p = 0.82; p = 0.68 adjusted for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) for all follow-ups). Both groups had mean migrations below acceptable thresholds. There was no difference in inducible displacement (p = 0.34) or PROMS (p = 0.61 for the Oxford Knee Score) between groups. There was no correlation between alignment and tibial component migration or alignment and inducible displacement. These findings support non-neutral alignment as a viable option with this component, with no evidence that it compromises fixation. Conclusion. Kinematic alignment using patient-specific instrumentation in TKA was associated with acceptable tibial component migration, indicating stable fixation. These results are supportive of future investigations of kinematic alignment. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:929–940

Aims. While mechanical alignment (MA) is the traditional technique in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), its potential for altering constitutional alignment remains poorly understood. This study aimed to quantify unintentional changes to constitutional coronal alignment and joint line obliquity (JLO) resulting from MA. Methods. A retrospective cohort study was undertaken of 700 primary MA TKAs (643 patients) performed between 2014 and 2017. Lateral distal femoral and medial proximal tibial angles were measured pre- and postoperatively to calculate the arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA), JLO, and Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) phenotypes. The primary outcome was the magnitude and direction of aHKA, JLO, and CPAK alterations. Results. The mean aHKA and JLO increased by 0.1° (SD 3.4°) and 5.8° (SD 3.5°), respectively, from pre- to postoperatively. The most common phenotypes shifted from 76.3% CPAK Types I, II, or III (apex distal JLO) preoperatively to 85.0% IV, V, or VI (apex horizontal JLO) postoperatively. The proportion of knees with apex proximal JLO increased from 0.7% preoperatively to 11.1% postoperatively. Among all MA TKAs, 60.0% (420 knees) were changed from their constitutional alignments into CPAK Type V, while 40.0% (280 knees) either remained in constitutional Type V (5.0%, 35 knees) or were unintentionally aligned into other CPAK types (35.0%; 245 knees). Conclusion. Fixed MA targets in TKA lead to substantial changes from constitutional alignment, primarily a significant increase in JLO. These findings enhance our understanding of alignment alterations resulting from both unintended changes to knee phenotypes and surgical resection imprecision. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(2):109–116

Aims. The surgical target for optimal implant positioning in robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty remains the subject of ongoing discussion. One of the proposed targets is to recreate the knee’s functional behaviour as per its pre-diseased state. The aim of this study was to optimize implant positioning, starting from mechanical alignment (MA), toward restoring the pre-diseased status, including ligament strain and kinematic patterns, in a patient population. Methods. We used an active appearance model-based approach to segment the preoperative CT of 21 osteoarthritic patients, which identified the osteophyte-free surfaces and estimated cartilage from the segmented bones; these geometries were used to construct patient-specific musculoskeletal models of the pre-diseased knee. Subsequently, implantations were simulated using the MA method, and a previously developed optimization technique was employed to find the optimal implant position that minimized the root mean square deviation between pre-diseased and postoperative ligament strains and kinematics. Results. There were evident biomechanical differences between the simulated patient models, but also trends that appeared reproducible at the population level. Optimizing the implant position significantly reduced the maximum observed strain root mean square deviations within the cohort from 36.5% to below 5.3% for all but the anterolateral ligament; and concomitantly reduced the kinematic deviations from 3.8 mm (SD 1.7) and 4.7° (SD 1.9°) with MA to 2.7 mm (SD 1.4) and 3.7° (SD 1.9°) relative to the pre-diseased state. To achieve this, the femoral component consistently required translational adjustments in the anterior, lateral, and proximal directions, while the tibial component required a more posterior slope and varus rotation in most cases. Conclusion. These findings confirm that MA-induced biomechanical alterations relative to the pre-diseased state can be reduced by optimizing the implant position, and may have implications to further advance pre-planning in robotic-assisted surgery in order to restore pre-diseased knee function. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(11):1231–1239

Aims. Accurate identification of the ankle joint centre is critical for estimating tibial coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the current study was to leverage artificial intelligence (AI) to determine the accuracy and effect of using different radiological anatomical landmarks to quantify mechanical alignment in relation to a traditionally defined radiological ankle centre. Methods. Patients with full-limb radiographs from the Osteoarthritis Initiative were included. A sub-cohort of 250 radiographs were annotated for landmarks relevant to knee alignment and used to train a deep learning (U-Net) workflow for angle calculation on the entire database. The radiological ankle centre was defined as the midpoint of the superior talus edge/tibial plafond. Knee alignment (hip-knee-ankle angle) was compared against 1) midpoint of the most prominent malleoli points, 2) midpoint of the soft-tissue overlying malleoli, and 3) midpoint of the soft-tissue sulcus above the malleoli. Results. A total of 932 bilateral full-limb radiographs (1,864 knees) were measured at a rate of 20.63 seconds/image. The knee alignment using the radiological ankle centre was accurate against ground truth radiologist measurements (inter-class correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.99 (0.98 to 0.99)). Compared to the radiological ankle centre, the mean midpoint of the malleoli was 2.3 mm (SD 1.3) lateral and 5.2 mm (SD 2.4) distal, shifting alignment by 0.34. o. (SD 2.4. o. ) valgus, whereas the midpoint of the soft-tissue sulcus was 4.69 mm (SD 3.55) lateral and 32.4 mm (SD 12.4) proximal, shifting alignment by 0.65. o. (SD 0.55. o. ) valgus. On the intermalleolar line, measuring a point at 46% (SD 2%) of the intermalleolar width from the medial malleoli (2.38 mm medial adjustment from midpoint) resulted in knee alignment identical to using the radiological ankle centre. Conclusion. The current study leveraged AI to create a consistent and objective model that can estimate patient-specific adjustments necessary for optimal landmark usage in extramedullary and computer-guided navigation for tibial coronal alignment to match radiological planning. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):767–776

Aims. Sagittal plane imbalance (SPI), or asymmetry between extension and flexion gaps, is an important issue in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to compare SPI between kinematic alignment (KA), mechanical alignment (MA), and functional alignment (FA) strategies. Methods. In 137 robotic-assisted TKAs, extension and flexion stressed gap laxities and bone resections were measured. The primary outcome was the proportion and magnitude of medial and lateral SPI (gap differential > 2.0 mm) for KA, MA, and FA. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of knees with severe (> 4.0 mm) SPI, and resection thicknesses for each technique, with KA as reference. Results. FA showed significantly lower rates of medial and lateral SPI (2.9% and 2.2%) compared to KA (45.3%; p < 0.001, and 25.5%; p < 0.001) and compared to MA (52.6%; p < 0.001 and 29.9%; p < 0.001). There was no difference in medial and lateral SPI between KA and MA (p = 0.228 and p = 0.417, respectively). FA showed significantly lower rates of severe medial and lateral SPI (0 and 0%) compared to KA (8.0%; p < 0.001 and 7.3%; p = 0.001) and compared to MA (10.2%; p < 0.001 and 4.4%; p = 0.013). There was no difference in severe medial and lateral SPI between KA and MA (p = 0.527 and p = 0.307, respectively). MA resulted in thinner resections than KA in medial extension (mean difference (MD) 1.4 mm, SD 1.9; p < 0.001), medial flexion (MD 1.5 mm, SD 1.8; p < 0.001), and lateral extension (MD 1.1 mm, SD 1.9; p < 0.001). FA resulted in thinner resections than KA in medial extension (MD 1.6 mm, SD 1.4; p < 0.001) and lateral extension (MD 2.0 mm, SD 1.6; p < 0.001), but in thicker medial flexion resections (MD 0.8 mm, SD 1.4; p < 0.001). Conclusion. Mechanical and kinematic alignment (measured resection techniques) result in high rates of SPI. Pre-resection angular and translational adjustments with functional alignment, with typically smaller distal than posterior femoral resection, address this issue. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(8):681–687

Limb alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) influences periarticular soft-tissue tension, biomechanics through knee flexion, and implant survival. Despite this, there is no uniform consensus on the optimal alignment technique for TKA. Neutral mechanical alignment facilitates knee flexion and symmetrical component wear but forces the limb into an unnatural position that alters native knee kinematics through the arc of knee flexion. Kinematic alignment aims to restore native limb alignment, but the safe ranges with this technique remain uncertain and the effects of this alignment technique on component survivorship remain unknown. Anatomical alignment aims to restore predisease limb alignment and knee geometry, but existing studies using this technique are based on cadaveric specimens or clinical trials with limited follow-up times. Functional alignment aims to restore the native plane and obliquity of the joint by manipulating implant positioning while limiting soft tissue releases, but the results of high-quality studies with long-term outcomes are still awaited. The drawbacks of existing studies on alignment include the use of surgical techniques with limited accuracy and reproducibility of achieving the planned alignment, poor correlation of intraoperative data to long-term functional outcomes and implant survivorship, and a paucity of studies on the safe ranges of limb alignment. Further studies on alignment in TKA should use surgical adjuncts (e.g. robotic technology) to help execute the planned alignment with improved accuracy, include intraoperative assessments of knee biomechanics and periarticular soft-tissue tension, and correlate alignment to long-term functional outcomes and survivorship

Aims. It is unknown whether kinematic alignment (KA) objectively improves knee balance in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), despite this being the biomechanical rationale for its use. This study aimed to determine whether restoring the constitutional alignment using a restrictive KA protocol resulted in better quantitative knee balance than mechanical alignment (MA). Methods. We conducted a randomized superiority trial comparing patients undergoing TKA assigned to KA within a restrictive safe zone or MA. Optimal knee balance was defined as an intercompartmental pressure difference (ICPD) of 15 psi or less using a pressure sensor. The primary endpoint was the mean intraoperative ICPD at 10° of flexion prior to knee balancing. Secondary outcomes included balance at 45° and 90°, requirements for balancing procedures, and presence of tibiofemoral lift-off. Results. A total of 63 patients (70 knees) were randomized to KA and 62 patients (68 knees) to MA. Mean ICPD at 10° flexion in the KA group was 11.7 psi (SD 13.1) compared with 32.0 psi in the MA group (SD 28.9), with a mean difference in ICPD between KA and MA of 20.3 psi (p < 0.001). Mean ICPD in the KA group was significantly lower than in the MA group at 45° and 90°, respectively (25.2 psi MA vs 14.8 psi KA, p = 0.004; 19.1 psi MA vs 11.7 psi KA, p < 0.002, respectively). Overall, participants in the KA group were more likely to achieve optimal knee balance (80% vs 35%; p < 0.001). Bone recuts to achieve knee balance were more likely to be required in the MA group (49% vs 9%; p < 0.001). More participants in the MA group had tibiofemoral lift-off (43% vs 13%; p < 0.001). Conclusion. This study provides persuasive evidence that restoring the constitutional alignment with KA in TKA results in a statistically significant improvement in quantitative knee balance, and further supports this technique as a viable alternative to MA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J. 2020;102-B(1):117–124

Correct positioning and alignment of components during primary total knee replacement (TKR) is widely accepted to be an important predictor of patient satisfaction and implant durability. This retrospective study reports the effect of the post-operative mechanical axis of the lower limb in the coronal plane on implant survival following primary TKR. A total of 501 TKRs in 396 patients were divided into an aligned group with a neutral mechanical axis (± 3°) and a malaligned group where the mechanical axis deviated from neutral by > 3°. At 15 years’ follow-up, 33 of 458 (7.2%) TKRs were revised for aseptic loosening. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a weak tendency towards improved survival with restoration of a neutral mechanical axis, but this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.47). We found that the relationship between survival of a primary TKR and mechanical axis alignment is weaker than that described in a number of previous reports

Aims

The aims of this study were to determine the proportion of patients with outlier varus or valgus alignment in kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA), whether those with outlier varus or valgus alignment have higher forces in the medial or lateral compartments of the knee than those with in-range alignment and whether measurements of the alignment of the limb, knee and components predict compartment forces.

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the post-operative radiographic and clinical outcomes between kinematically and mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasties (TKAs).

Aims. Alternative alignment concepts, including kinematic and restricted kinematic, have been introduced to help improve clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical results, along with patient satisfaction, following TKA using the concept of restricted kinematic alignment. Methods. A total of 121 consecutive TKAs performed between 11 February 2018 to 11 June 2019 with preoperative varus deformity were reviewed at minimum one-year follow-up. Three knees were excluded due to severe preoperative varus deformity greater than 15°, and a further three due to requiring revision surgery, leaving 109 patients and 115 knees to undergo primary TKA using the concept of restricted kinematic alignment with advanced technology. Patients were stratified into three groups based on the preoperative limb varus deformity: Group A with 1° to 5° varus (43 knees); Group B between 6° and 10° varus (56 knees); and Group C with varus greater than 10° (16 knees). This study group was compared with a matched cohort of 115 TKAs and 115 patients using a neutral mechanical alignment target with manual instruments performed from 24 October 2016 to 14 January 2019. Results. Mean overall patient satisfaction for the entire cohort was 4.7 (SE 0.1) on a 5-point Likert scale, with 93% being either very satisfied or satisfied compared with a Likert of 4.3 and patient satisfaction of 81% in the mechanical alignment group (p < 0.001 and p < 0.006 respectively). At mean follow-up of 17 months (11 to 27), the mean overall Likert, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Forgotten Joint Score, and Knee Society Knee and Function Scores were significantly better in the kinematic group than in the neutral mechanical alignment group. The most common complication in both groups was contracture requiring manipulation under anaesthesia, involving seven knees (6.1%) in the kinematic group and nine knees (7.8%) in the mechanical alignment group. Conclusion. With the advent of advanced technology, and the ability to obtain accurate bone cuts, the target limb alignment, and soft-tissue balance within millimetres, using a restricted kinematic alignment concept demonstrated excellent patient satisfaction following primary TKA. Longer-term analysis is required as to the durability of this method. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):59–66

Aims. The aims of this study were: 1) to describe extended restricted kinematic alignment (E-rKA), a novel alignment strategy during robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA); 2) to compare residual medial compartment tightness following virtual surgical planning during RA-TKA using mechanical alignment (MA) and E-rKA, in the same set of osteoarthritic varus knees; 3) to assess the requirement of soft-tissue releases during RA-TKA using E-rKA; and 4) to compare the accuracy of surgical plan execution between knees managed with adjustments in component positioning alone, and those which require additional soft-tissue releases. Methods. Patients who underwent RA-TKA between January and December 2022 for primary varus osteoarthritis were included. Safe boundaries for E-rKA were defined. Residual medial compartment tightness was compared following virtual surgical planning using E-rKA and MA, in the same set of knees. Soft-tissue releases were documented. Errors in postoperative alignment in relation to planned alignment were compared between patients who did (group A) and did not (group B) require soft-tissue releases. Results. The use of E-rKA helped restore all knees within the predefined boundaries, with appropriate soft-tissue balancing. E-rKA compared with MA resulted in reduced residual medial tightness following surgical planning, in full extension (2.71 mm (SD 1.66) vs 5.16 mm (SD 3.10), respectively; p < 0.001), and 90° of flexion (2.52 mm (SD 1.63) vs 6.27 mm (SD 3.11), respectively; p < 0.001). Among the study population, 156 patients (78%) were managed with minor adjustments in component positioning alone, while 44 (22%) required additional soft-tissue releases. The mean errors in postoperative alignment were 0.53 mm and 0.26 mm among patients in group A and group B, respectively (p = 0.328). Conclusion. E-rKA is an effective and reproducible alignment strategy during RA-TKA, permitting a large proportion of patients to be managed without soft-tissue releases. The execution of minor alterations in component positioning within predefined multiplanar boundaries is a better starting point for gap management than soft-tissue releases. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(8):628–636

The kinematic alignment (KA) approach to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has recently increased in popularity. Accordingly, a number of derivatives have arisen and have caused confusion. Clarification is therefore needed for a better understanding of KA-TKA. Calipered (or true, pure) KA is performed by cutting the bone parallel to the articular surface, compensating for cartilage wear. In soft-tissue respecting KA, the tibial cutting surface is decided parallel to the femoral cutting surface (or trial component) with in-line traction. These approaches are categorized as unrestricted KA because there is no consideration of leg alignment or component orientation. Restricted KA is an approach where the periarthritic joint surface is replicated within a safe range, due to concerns about extreme alignments that have been considered ‘alignment outliers’ in the neutral mechanical alignment approach. More recently, functional alignment and inverse kinematic alignment have been advocated, where bone cuts are made following intraoperative planning, using intraoperative measurements acquired with computer assistance to fulfill good coordination of soft-tissue balance and alignment. The KA-TKA approach aims to restore the patients’ own harmony of three knee elements (morphology, soft-tissue balance, and alignment) and eventually the patients’ own kinematics. The respective approaches start from different points corresponding to one of the elements, yet each aim for the same goal, although the existing implants and techniques have not yet perfectly fulfilled that goal

Aims. A comprehensive classification for coronal lower limb alignment with predictive capabilities for knee balance would be beneficial in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This paper describes the Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification and examines its utility in preoperative soft tissue balance prediction, comparing kinematic alignment (KA) to mechanical alignment (MA). Methods. A radiological analysis of 500 healthy and 500 osteoarthritic (OA) knees was used to assess the applicability of the CPAK classification. CPAK comprises nine phenotypes based on the arithmetic HKA (aHKA) that estimates constitutional limb alignment and joint line obliquity (JLO). Intraoperative balance was compared within each phenotype in a cohort of 138 computer-assisted TKAs randomized to KA or MA. Primary outcomes included descriptive analyses of healthy and OA groups per CPAK type, and comparison of balance at 10° of flexion within each type. Secondary outcomes assessed balance at 45° and 90° and bone recuts required to achieve final knee balance within each CPAK type. Results. There was similar frequency distribution between healthy and arthritic groups across all CPAK types. The most common categories were Type II (39.2% healthy vs 32.2% OA), Type I (26.4% healthy vs 19.4% OA) and Type V (15.4% healthy vs 14.6% OA). CPAK Types VII, VIII, and IX were rare in both populations. Across all CPAK types, a greater proportion of KA TKAs achieved optimal balance compared to MA. This effect was largest, and statistically significant, in CPAK Types I (100% KA vs 15% MA; p < 0.001), Type II (78% KA vs 46% MA; p = 0.018). and Type IV (89% KA vs 0% MA; p < 0.001). Conclusion. CPAK is a pragmatic, comprehensive classification for coronal knee alignment, based on constitutional alignment and JLO, that can be used in healthy and arthritic knees. CPAK identifies which knee phenotypes may benefit most from KA when optimization of soft tissue balance is prioritized. Further, it will allow for consistency of reporting in future studies. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(2):329–337

Abstract. Introduction. OtisMed Shape Match ® patient specific implant cutting jigs were designed to place TKA in kinematic alignment (KA) rather than traditional mechanical alignment (MA). This product was withdrawn from the market in 2013. It has been hypothesised that KA might lead to early implant failure. Initial evidence has not supported this. We present 10 year outcome data for the largest single centre cohort to date. Methodology. Between 2010 and 2013, 127 Shape Match® TKAs were implanted in 119 individuals. Retrospective review of long leg post-operative radiographs assessed femoral mechanical anatomical angle (FMA), tibial mechanical angle (TMA), hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), posterior tibial slope (PTS) and femoral component flexion. Oxford Knee Scores (OKS), revision and further surgery rates were reviewed. Results. 4 (3.1%) patients underwent revision for instability, recurrent haemarthrosis, stiffness and infection respectively. In this subgroup, PTS ranged from 9–25° (SD 7.5°). PTS range for non-revision subgroup was 1–23° (SD 4.6). 1 patient with a PTS of 21° had failure of quadriceps tendon, but was not revised. Mean OKS at 1year = 38.1 (SD 1.08), 2 years = 39.3 (SD 1.08), 5 years = 40.8 (SD 4.11). PTS had the largest impact on OKS, with <10° slope conferring a higher OKS. Conclusions. At 10 year follow up, this cohort did identify several cases where excessive PTS was evident. This may have led to revision surgery and contributed post-operative complications. PTS, unlike other alignment measures, impacted OKS results. Overall revision rate and OKS were consistent with registry and other published data

Introduction. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) reliably improves pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), though a substantial percentage of patients remain unsatisfied. Reasons include the presence of complications, persistent pain, and unmet expectations. The aim of this study was to determine whether the sequential addition of accelerometer-based navigation of the distal femoral cut and sensor-assisted soft tissue balancing changed complication rates, radiographic alignment, or patient-reported outcomes (PROs) compared to TKA performed with conventional instrumentation. Methods. This retrospective cohort study included 371 TKAs in 319 patients. All surgeries were performed by a single surgeon in sequential fashion using a measured resection technique with a goal of mechanical alignment. The historical control group, utilizing intramedullary guides for distal femoral resection and surgeon-guided soft tissue balancing, was compared to group 1 (accelerometer-based navigation for distal femoral resection, surgeon-guided balancing) and group 2 (navigated femoral resection, sensor-guided balancing). Primary outcome measures were PROMIS scores including physical function computerized adaptive test (PF CAT), and the Global 10 health assessment (including physical, mental, and pain scores), and Knee Injury Osteoarthritis and Outcome Score (KOOS), measured preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 12 months postoperatively. Radiographic measurements included component position and overall mechanical alignment of the limb and were made at 6 weeks by a single examiner from hip to ankle standing films. Charts were reviewed for pre- and postoperative ROM at 6 weeks, polyethylene insert morphology, and postoperative hematocrit change. Complications were recorded, including manipulation under anesthesia and reoperation. Our study was powered to detect a difference of 1 standard deviation in PF CAT score with 100 patients. Statistical analysis was performed by a statistician including t-tests, multivariate regression, and time series plot analyses. Results. There were 194 patients in the control group, 103 in group 1, and 74 in group 2. There was no difference in baseline patient demographics. Patients in group 2 had higher baseline mental health subscores than control and group 1 patients (53.2 vs 50.2 vs 50.2, p=0.04). There were no differences in 6-week and one-year postop PF CAT, physical or mental subscores, pain scores, or KOOS scores (all p>0.05). There were 8 total complications in the control group (4.1%), 4 in group 1 (3.8%), and 1 in group 2 (1.4%) (p>0.4). The postoperative mechanical axis of the limb was within 3 degrees of neutral in 71.6% of control patients, 74.8% in group 1, and 85.1% in group 2 (p=0.1). There was no difference in femoral component coronal alignment between groups (p=0.91), though controls had a small but significantly higher degree of flexion in the sagittal plane (6.5 degrees) than groups 1 and 2 (5.4 degrees in both, p=0.003). There was no difference in postoperative ROM or blood loss. Conclusions. The sequential addition of imageless navigation of the distal femoral cut and sensor-guided ligament balancing did not confer any benefit to short term PROs, radiographic outcomes, or complication rates over conventional techniques. While overall mechanical alignment of the limb was improved in groups 1 and 2 compared to controls, this did not reach statistical significance. The additive costs of navigation and soft-tissue balancing technologies may not be justified. For figures, tables, or references, please contact authors directly

Aims. Our aim was to compare kinematic with mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Patients and Methods. We performed a prospective blinded randomised controlled trial to compare the functional outcome of patients undergoing TKA in mechanical alignment (MA) with those in kinematic alignment (KA). A total of 71 patients undergoing TKA were randomised to either kinematic (n = 36) or mechanical alignment (n = 35). Pre- and post-operative hip-knee-ankle radiographs were analysed. The knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), American Knee Society Score, Short Form-36, Euro-Qol (EQ-5D), range of movement (ROM), two minute walk, and timed up and go tests were assessed pre-operatively and at six weeks, three and six months and one year post-operatively. Results. A total of 78% of the kinematically aligned group (28 patients) and 77% of the mechanically aligned group (27 patients) were within 3° of their pre-operative plan. There were no statistically significant differences in the mean KOOS (difference 1.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) -9.4 to 12.1, p = 0.80), EQ-5D (difference 0.8, 95% CI -7.9 to 9.6, p = 0.84), ROM (difference 0.1, 95% CI -6.0 to 6.1, p = 0.99), two minute distance tolerance (difference 20.0, 95% CI -52.8 to 92.8, p = 0.58), or timed up and go (difference 0.78, 95% CI -2.3 to 3.9, p = 0.62) between the groups at one year. Conclusion. Kinematically aligned TKAs appear to have comparable short-term results to mechanically aligned TKAs with no significant differences in function one year post-operatively. Further research is required to see if any theoretical long-term functional benefits of kinematic alignment are realised or if there are any potential effects on implant survival. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1360–8

Introduction. The purpose of this study was to determine if better outcomes occur with use of robotic-arm assistance by comparing consecutive series of non-robotic assisted (NR-TKA) and robotic-arm assisted (NR-TKA) total knee arthroplasties with the same implant. Methods. 80 NR-TKAs and then 101 RA-TKAs were performed consecutively. 70 knees in each group that had a minimum two-year follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Range of motion, Knee Society (KS) scores, and forgotten joint scores (FJS) were compared using Mann-Whitney U tests. Tourniquets, used for all cases, had their inflation time recorded. Component realignment to minimize soft tissue releases was used in both groups with the goal to stay within a mechanical alignment of 3° of varus to 2° of valgus. The use of soft tissue releases for balance were compared. Results. There were no statistical differences in baseline characteristics including pre-operative Knee Society scores between cohorts. The two-year NR-TKA and RA-TKA median KS knee and functional scores were 99.0 and 90.0 and 100.0 and 100.0 respectively. Mann-Whitney U test indicated a statistically significant difference in KS-KS (p<.00001) and near statistically significant difference in KS-FS (p=0.075). The 10-point higher KS-FS is considered a minimal clinically important difference. The median FJS at two years for the NR-TKA was 61.5 and the RA-TKA was 75.0. Although not statistically significant (p=0.1556), the 13.5-point increase in the RA-TKA cohort also represents a minimal clinically important difference. RA-TKA patients had statistically significant 5° higher knee flexion (p<.00001). Desired post-operative coronal alignment was present in 92.9% of NR-TKAs and 94.3% of RA-TKAs. 28.6% more of the RA-TKA cases were able to be balanced without a soft tissue release. Median tourniquet time was only 3.9 minutes longer for the robotic-arm assisted cohort. Conclusion. This comparison study demonstrates potential benefits in use of robotic-arm assistance over manual instrumentation in TKA