Background

The use of Computed Tomography (CT) as a medical imaging tool has widespread applications in the field of knee surgery. Surgeons use a CT scan in a conventional way during the pre-operative stage, to plan the position of the femoral component in the horizontal plane. In the post-operative stage, the use of a CT scan is a routine tool in the evaluation of failed TKA as rotational malalignment of the femoral component has been determined as a cause of poor clinical outcome after TKA.

Eligible patients were randomly allocated to PMI or standard intramedullary jigs. Smith and Nephew's patient specific cutting blocks (Visionaire) were used for PMI. Postoperative component positioning was investigated using the ‘Perth CT protocol’. Deviation of more than 3° from the recommended position was regarded as an outlier. Exact Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare component positioning and difference in proportion of outliers was calculated using Chi Squared analysis.

Fifty-five knees were enrolled in the standard instrumentation group and fifty-two knees in the PMI group.

Coronal femoral alignment was 0.7 ± 1.9° (standard) vs 0.5 ± 1.6° (PMI) (P=0.33). Outliers 9.4% vs 7.4% (P=0.71). Coronal tibial alignment was 0.4 ± 1.5° (standard) vs 0.6 ± 1.4° (PMI) (P=0.56). Outliers 1.9% vs 1.9% (P=0.99). Sagittal femoral alignment was 0.6 ± 1.5° (standard) vs 1.3 ± 1.9° (PMI) (P=0.07). Outliers 3.8% vs 13.2% (P=0.09). Tibial slope was 1.7 ± 1.9 ° (standard) vs 1.8 ± 2.7° (PMI) (P=0.88). Outliers 13.2% vs 24.1% (P=0.15). External rotation of femoral component was 0.6 ± 1.4° (standard) vs 0.2 ± 1.8° (PMI) (P=0.14). Outliers: 3.8% vs 5.6% (P=0.66).

Compared to standard intramedullary jigs, patient matched instrumentation does not improve component positioning or reduce alignment outliers.

Purpose: Coronal mal-alignment contributes to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) failure. The surgical aim is to place the implant at right angles to the load-bearing axis, restoring the femoral and tibial mechanical axes (MA) to neutral. Mal-alignment of greater than 3° is associated with a poor outcome and reduced longevity. Pre-operative decisions for alignment correction are often made using anatomical axis (AA) measurements taken from standing short knee radiographs. The aim of this study was to determine how well the AA predicts the MA in subjects with mild and severe varus and valgus deformities. Several different methods of calculating the AA were also compared for their ability to predict the MA.

Method: The database of full-length lower extremity radiographs from the Multicenter Osteoarthritis (MOST) Study was used to select images for this study. All of the subjects in the MOST either had knee OA or were at high risk for developing knee OA. 120 full-length digital radiographs were assigned, with 30 in each of four alignment groups (0° to 4.9°, and ≥ 5° of varus and 0.1° to 4.9°, and ≥ 5° of valgus). The MA and 5 measures of the AA (using progressively shorter shaft lengths) were obtained from each radiograph using Horizons Analysis Software, OAISYS Inc. The offsets between the MA and the different versions of the AA were calculated (with 95% confidence intervals) for the complete sample of 120 limbs and for each alignment group. Pearson correlations were also calculated (α = 0.05).

Results: The average offset between the MA and the AA for the entire dataset was 5.0°. In varus limbs the shortened shaft AA measurements increased the offset from 5.1° to 7.0°. The opposite occurred with valgus limbs (from 5.0° to 3.7°). The CI for the offsets increased from less than 3° for the full-length AA measurements to over 8.3° for the shortest AAs. While correlations between MA and AA for the whole dataset were high (0.88 to 1.00), correlations for individual groups were much lower, especially for the shortest AA (0.41 to 0.66).

Conclusion: Using short knee radiographs to estimate the MA has important limitations. The offsets obtained using the shorter AAs vary depending on type and degree of mal-alignment, and do not provide reliable predictions for the MA. Full-length films are needed to consistently define the alignment in order to ensure the best outcome from TKA.

We have previously reported the short-term radiological results of a randomised controlled trial comparing kinematically aligned total knee replacement (TKR) and mechanically aligned TKR, along with early pain and function scores. In this study we report the two-year clinical results from this trial. A total of 88 patients (88 knees) were randomly allocated to undergo either kinematically aligned TKR using patient-specific guides, or mechanically aligned TKR using conventional instruments. They were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The patients and the clinical evaluator were blinded to the method of alignment.

At a minimum of two years, all outcomes were better for the kinematically aligned group, as determined by the mean Oxford knee score (40 (15 to 48) versus 33 (13 to 48); p = 0.005), the mean Western Ontario McMaster Universities Arthritis index (WOMAC) (15 (0 to 63) versus 26 (0 to 73); p = 0.005), mean combined Knee Society score (160 (93 to 200) versus 137 (64 to 200); p= 0.005) and mean flexion of 121° (100 to 150) versus 113° (80 to 130) (p = 0.002). The odds ratio of having a pain-free knee at two years with the kinematically aligned technique (Oxford and WOMAC pain scores) was 3.2 (p = 0.020) and 4.9 (p = 0.001), respectively, compared with the mechanically aligned technique. Patients in the kinematically aligned group walked a mean of 50 feet further in hospital prior to discharge compared with the mechanically aligned group (p = 0.044).

In this study, the use of a kinematic alignment technique performed with patient-specific guides provided better pain relief and restored better function and range of movement than the mechanical alignment technique performed with conventional instruments.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:907–13.

Introduction:

Recently there has been interest in an alternative method of aligning a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) referred to as kinematic alignment. The theoretical appeal of this method is that alignment of each patient's knee can be individualized through the use of preoperative imaging and computer software, with the goal of achieving pre-arthritic alignment through restoration of the axes of rotation of each particular knee. Clinical studies have evaluated the outcomes of this new alignment technique, but to date there have been no randomized controlled trials comparing kinematic alignment to mechanical alignment. This randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare kinematically aligned and mechanically aligned TKA outcomes of knee pain, function and motion at two years' post-op, along with a comparison of limb, knee, and implant alignment of the two methods.

Introduction

Robotics have been applied to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to improve surgical precision in component placement and joint function restoration. The purpose of this study was to evaluate prosthetic component alignment in robotic arm-assisted (RA)-TKA performed with functional alignment and intraoperative fine-tuning, aiming for symmetric medial and lateral gaps in flexion/extension. It was hypothesized that functionally aligned RA-TKA the femoral and tibial cuts would be performed in line with the preoperative joint line orientation.

Aims. The mid-term results of kinematic alignment (KA) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using image derived instrumentation (IDI) have not been reported in detail, and questions remain regarding ligamentous stability and revisions. This paper aims to address the following: 1) what is the distribution of alignment of KA TKAs using IDI; 2) is a TKA alignment category associated with increased risk of failure or poor patient outcomes; 3) does extending limb alignment lead to changes in soft-tissue laxity; and 4) what is the five-year survivorship and outcomes of KA TKA using IDI?. Methods. A prospective, multicentre, trial enrolled 100 patients undergoing KA TKA using IDI, with follow-up to five years. Alignment measures were conducted pre- and postoperatively to assess constitutional alignment and final implant position. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of pain and function were also included. The Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Arthroplasty Registry was used to assess survivorship. Results. The postoperative HKA distribution varied from 9° varus to 11° valgus. All PROMs showed statistical improvements at one year (p < 0.001), with further improvements at five years for Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score symptoms (p = 0.041) and Forgotten Joint Score (p = 0.011). Correlation analysis showed no difference (p = 0.610) between the hip-knee-ankle and joint line congruence angle at one and five years. Sub-group analysis showed no difference in PROMs for patients placed within 3° of neutral compared to those placed > 3°. There were no revisions for tibial loosening; however, there were reports of a higher incidence of poor patella tracking and patellofemoral stiffness. Conclusion. PROMs were not impacted by postoperative alignment category. Ligamentous stability was maintained at five years with joint line obliquity. There were no revisions for tibial loosening despite a significant portion of tibiae placed in varus; however, KA executed with IDI resulted in a higher than anticipated rate of patella complications. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(8):656–665

Aims. The Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification is a simple and comprehensive system for predicting pre-arthritic knee alignment. However, when the CPAK classification is applied in the Asian population, which is characterized by more varus and wider distribution in lower limb alignment, modifications in the boundaries of arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA) and joint line obliquity (JLO) should be considered. The purposes of this study were as follows: first, to propose a modified CPAK classification based on the actual joint line obliquity (aJLO) and wider range of aHKA in the Asian population; second, to test this classification in a cohort of Asians with healthy knees; third, to propose individualized alignment targets for different CPAK types in kinematically aligned (KA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods. The CPAK classification was modified by changing the neutral boundaries of aHKA to 0° ± 3° and using aJLO as a new variable. Radiological analysis of 214 healthy knees in 214 Asian individuals was used to assess the distribution and mean value of alignment angles of each phenotype among different classifications based on the coronal plane. Individualized alignment targets were set according to the mean lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA) and medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) of different knee types. Results. A very high concentration, 191 from 214 individuals (89.3%), were found in knee types with apex distal JLO when the CPAK classification was applied in the Asian population. By using aJLO as a new variable, the high distribution percentage in knee types with apex distal JLO decreased to 125 from 214 individuals (58.4%). The most common types in order were Type II (n = 70; 32.7%), Type V (n = 55; 25.7%), and Type I (n = 46; 21.5%) in the modified CPAK classification. Conclusion. The modified CPAK classification corrected the uneven distribution when applying the CPAK classification in the Asian population. Setting individualized TKA alignment targets according to CPAK type may be a practical method to recreate optimal LDFA and MPTA in KA-TKA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(3):211–217

The February 2023 Knee Roundup. 360. looks at: Machine-learning models: are all complications predictable?; Positive cultures can be safely ignored in revision arthroplasty patients that do not meet the 2018 International Consensus Meeting Criteria; Spinal versus general anaesthesia in contemporary primary total knee arthroplasty; Preoperative pain and early arthritis are associated with poor outcomes in total knee arthroplasty; Risk factors for infection and revision surgery following patellar tendon and quadriceps tendon repairs; Supervised versus unsupervised rehabilitation following total knee arthroplasty; Kinematic alignment has similar outcomes to mechanical alignment: a systematic review and meta-analysis; Lifetime risk of revision after knee arthroplasty influenced by age, sex, and indication; Risk factors for knee osteoarthritis after traumatic knee injury

Anatomical total knee arthroplasty alignment versus conventional mechanical alignment; or a combination?

Introduction: Contact stresses, derived from navigation system and conventional TKR alignments, are compared to ideally aligned component stresses. Methods: This study builds upon the work of previous studies, in which post-operative CT scans from 70 patients were utilized to extract knee component angular alignments from patients undergoing both navigation based and conventional TKR. Knee component (Stryker Orthopaedics Duracon. TM. Condylar) FE models were oriented into specific alignment positions. Tibial insert contact stresses were computed under physiologically relevant loads at various flexion angles. FEA was also performed on ideally aligned cases for comparison purposes. Results: At full extension, the median alignment of conventional TKR induces contact stresses 17.8% above ideal alignment conditions. Navigation based TKR alignment induces stresses 3.5% above ideal alignment conditions. At 45–90° flexion, conventional TKR alignment induces stresses 2.7% above ideal alignment conditions, while comparable navigation based TKR alignment induces stresses that match ideal alignment conditions. Conclusion: Navigation based TKR procedures improve knee component alignment, which decreases contact stresses in UHMWPE tibial inserts. The result is a reduction in abnormal wear patterns and expected wear rates, with an increase in the structural longevity of knee system components

The primary objective of navigation systems is to optimise component alignment to improve total knee replacement (TKR) performance. This study utilizes finite element analysis techniques to determine how component alignment affects tibial insert contact stresses. Contact stresses were derived from navigation system and conventional TKR alignments, and were compared to ideally aligned components. This study builds upon the work of a previous study, in which post-operative CT scans from 70 patients were utilized to extract knee component angular alignments. These patients had been randomised to having either navigation based or conventional TKR. Knee component finite element models were oriented into specific alignment positions. Tibial insert contact stresses were computed under physiologically relevant loads at various flexion angles. Finite element analysis was also performed on ideally aligned cases for comparison purposes. At full extension, the median alignment of conventional TKR induces contact stresses 17.8% above ideal alignment conditions. Navigation based TKR alignment induces stresses 3.5% above ideal alignment conditions. At 45–90° flexion, conventional TKR alignment induces stresses 2.7% above ideal alignment conditions, while comparable navigation based TKR alignment induces stresses that match ideal alignment conditions. Knee component alignment is improved by navigation techniques. This predictive finite element analysis study shows markedly reduced contact stresses for navigation aligned TKR compared to conventional aligned technique. The reduction in tibial insert contact pressures could reduce abnormal polyethylene wear, increasing the structural longevity of knee system components

Most discussions of alignment after TKA focus on defining “malalignment”; the prefix mal- is derived from Latin and refers to bad, abnormal or defective and thus by definition malalignment is bad, abnormal or defective alignment. No one then wants a “malaligned” knee. The intellectually curious, however, might switch the focus to the other end of the spectrum and ask what does an ideally aligned knee look like in 2015? Is there really one simple target value for alignment in all patients undergoing TKA? Is that target broad (zero +/−3 degrees mechanical axis) or is it a narrow target in which a penalty, in regard to durability or function, is incurred as soon as you deviate even 1 degree? Is that ideal target the same if we are evaluating the functional performance of the TKA versus the durability of the TKA or could there be 2 different targets, one that maximises function and one that maximises durability? Is that target adequately described by a single 2-dimensional value (varus/valgus alignment in the frontal plane) as measured on a static radiograph? Is that value the same if the patient has a fixed pelvic obliquity, a varus thrust in the contralateral knee or an abnormal foot progression angle?. It is revealing to ask “do we understand TKA alignment better in 2015 than in 1979…?” Maybe not. We allowed ourselves over the past 2 decades to be intellectually complacent in regard to questions of ideal alignment after TKA. The constraints on accuracy imposed by our standard total knee instruments and the constraints on assessment imposed by 2-dimensional radiographs made broad, simple targets like a mechanical axis +/− 3 degrees reasonable starting points yet we have not further worked to verify if we can do better. It is naïve to think that the complex motion at the knee occurring in 6-dimensions over time can be reduced to a single static target value like a neutral mechanical axis and have strong predictive value in regard to the success or failure of an individual TKA. We assessed 399 knees of 3 different modern cemented designs at 15 years and found that factors other than alignment were more important than alignment in determining the 15-year survival. Until more precise alignment targets can be identified for individual patients or sub-groups of patients then a neutral mechanical axis remains a reasonable surgical goal. However, the traditional description of TKA alignment as a dichotomous variable (aligned versus malaligned) defined around the broad, generic target value of 0 +/− 3 degrees relative to the mechanical axis is of little practical value in predicting the durability or function of modern TKA

Orthopaedic surgeons are currently faced with an overwhelming number of choices surrounding total knee arthroplasty (TKA), not only with the latest technologies and prostheses, but also fundamental decisions on alignment philosophies. From ‘mechanical’ to ‘adjusted mechanical’ to ‘restricted kinematic’ to ‘unrestricted kinematic’ — and how constitutional alignment relates to these — there is potential for ambiguity when thinking about and discussing such concepts. This annotation summarizes the various alignment strategies currently employed in TKA. It provides a clear framework and consistent language that will assist surgeons to compare confidently and contrast the concepts, while also discussing the latest opinions about alignment in TKA. Finally, it provides suggestions for applying consistent nomenclature to future research, especially as we explore the implications of 3D alignment patterns on patient outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(2):102–108

The October 2023 Knee Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Cementless total knee arthroplasty is associated with more revisions within a year; Kinematically and mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasties: long-term follow-up; Aspirin thromboprophylaxis following primary total knee arthroplasty is associated with a lower rate of early periprosthetic joint infection compared with other agents; The impact of a revision arthroplasty network on patient outcomes; Re-revision knee arthroplasty in a tertiary centre: how does infection impact on outcomes?; Does the knee joint have its own microbiome?; Revision knee surgery provision in Scotland; Aspirin is a safe and effective thromboembolic prophylaxis after total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis; Patellar resurfacing and kneeling ability after total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

The aim of mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty is to align all knees into a fixed neutral position, even though not all knees are the same. As a result, mechanical alignment often alters a patient’s constitutional alignment and joint line obliquity, resulting in soft-tissue imbalance. This annotation provides an overview of how the Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification can be used to predict imbalance with mechanical alignment, and then offers practical guidance for bone balancing, minimizing the need for soft-tissue releases. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(6):525–531

Aims

Robotic arm-assisted surgery offers accurate and reproducible guidance in component positioning and assessment of soft-tissue tensioning during knee arthroplasty, but the feasibility and early outcomes when using this technology for revision surgery remain unknown. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic arm-assisted revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) versus primary robotic arm-assisted TKA at short-term follow-up.

THA: Approaches and Recovery; THA: Instability and Spinal Deformity; Revision for THA Instability: Dual Mobility Cups; Removal of Infected THA: Risk Factors for Complications; Tribocorrosion: Incidence in the Symptomatic THA; THA: Outcomes and Education Levels; THA: Satisfaction levels and Residual Symptoms; THA: Expectations and LOS; TKA: Kneeling and Recreation Expectations; TKA: Alignment and Long Term Survival; Patello-Femoral Arthroplasty vs TKA; Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty and Age; Wound Treatments and Sepsis in TJA; TKA: Managing Sepsis With I & D; Chronic Salvage in TKA: When is Enough Enough?; Revision TKA: Single Component Revision

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.

Aims

This study aimed to analyze kinematics and kinetics of the tibiofemoral joint in healthy subjects with valgus, neutral, and varus limb alignment throughout multiple gait activities using dynamic videofluoroscopy.