After over 4 decades of experience with total knee arthroplasty, many lessons have been learned regarding surgical technique.

These include exposure issues, alignment methods, bone preparation, correction of deformity, implantation techniques and wound closure.

Where is the proper placement of the skin incision relative to the tibial tubercle? How does one safely evert the patella in the obese or ankylosed knee? Can a tibial tubercle osteotomy be avoided in the ankylosed knee? How does one protect the patellar tendon insertion from avulsing? How do you protect the soft tissues from debris and contamination and minimise the potential for infection? Can exposure be maintained if there are few surgical assistants? How do you find the lateral inferior genicular vessels and minimise postoperative bleeding? How do you know where to enter the intramedullary femoral canal for placement of the distal femoral alignment device? How can you avoid notching the anterior femoral cortex when in-between sizes or there is a pre-existing dysplastic trochlea? How can you correct a varus deformity without performing a formal MCL release? An inverted cruciform lateral retinacular release effectively corrects a severe valgus deformity and avoids the need for an LCL release. Trimming the posterior femoral condyles and removing posterior osteophytes is best accomplished using a trial femoral component as a template. Zone 4 femoral bone-cement radiolucencies can be minimised using the “smear” technique. The best indicator of potential postoperative flexion is not preoperative flexion but is intraoperative flexion against gravity measured after capsular closure.

Maltracking of the patella associated with TKA is usually the result of several factors coming together in the same patient. Causes of maltracking include residual valgus limb alignment, valgus placement of the femoral component, patella alta, poor prosthetic geometry, internal rotation of the femoral or tibial component, excessive patellar thickness, asymmetric patellar preparation, failure to perform a lateral release when indicated, capsular dehiscence, and dynamic instability.

Prior to wound closure after implantation of total knee arthroplasty, patellar tracking should be evaluated to assess the potential need for lateral release. The incidence of lateral release in the past was quite high in some series.

Most experienced surgeons will report a lateral release rate less than 5% for varus knees. It is usually higher for valgus knees because they are often associated with patella alta and preoperative subluxation. The classic intraoperative test for patellar tracking has been referred to as the “rule of no thumb” In this test, first suggested by Fred Ewald, the patella is returned to the trochlear groove in extension with the capsule unclosed. The knee is then passively flexed and one assesses whether or not the patella tracks congruently without capsular closure. If it does and the medial facet of the patellar component contacts the medial aspect of the trochlea no lateral release need be considered. If the patella dislocates or tilts, lateral release may be necessary. The test should be repeated with 1 suture closing the capsule at the level of the superior pole. If tracking then becomes congruent without excessive tension on the suture, no release is necessary. If tilting still persists, some surgeons like to assess tracking with the tourniquet deflated so that any binding effect on the quadriceps can be eliminated from the test. A tight PCL can also impart apparent patellar tilt as the femoral component is drawn posteriorly while the tibia (with its tubercle) moves anteriorly.

Lateral unicompartmental replacement is performed less frequently than medial replacement and is technically more difficult. The ratio of medial to lateral arthroplasties is approximately 10:1.

Differences in technique include the following:

The patella is more vulnerable to impingement on the leading edge of the femoral component and must be carefully recessed. Because the wear pattern in lateral disease is more posterior than in medial disease, there is often residual cartilage on the distal femoral condyle. This is also the case when UKA is performed for the sequella of a lateral plateau fracture. To avoid this impingement, residual cartilage should probably be removed from the distal condyle before its resection and the femoral component should be under-sized anteriorly.

Initial tibial resection should be very conservative to avoid the need for very thick tibial components to restore alignment and stability.

Err toward shifting the femoral component laterally and the tibial component medially to maximise M-L congruency.

Consider a medial parapatellar approach (avoiding the anterior horn of the medial meniscus) to facilitate visibility and component alignment.

To consider bilateral simultaneous knee replacement, both knees must have significant structural damage. It is best if the patient can't decide which knee is more bothersome. In borderline cases, ask the patient to pretend that the worse knee is normal and if so, would they be seeing you for consideration of knee replacement on the less involved side. If the answer to this question is “yes,” consider the patient a potential candidate for bilateral knee replacement. If the answer is “no,” recommend operating only on the worse knee, and expect that the operation on the second knee can probably be delayed for a considerable period of time.

Strong indications for bilateral simultaneous TKA are bilateral severe angular deformity, bilateral severe flexion contracture, and anesthesia difficulties, i.e., patients who are anatomically or medically difficult to anesthetise, such as some adult or juvenile rheumatoid arthritis patients or patients with severe ankylosing spondylitis.

Relative indications for bilateral simultaneous TKA include the need for multiple additional surgical procedures to achieve satisfactory function and financial or social considerations for the patient. Contraindications to bilateral TKA include medical infirmity (especially cardiac), a reluctant patient, and a patient with a very low pain threshold.

When performing bilateral simultaneous TKA, both limbs are prepped and draped at the same time. An initial dose of an intravenous antibiotic is given (usually 1g of a cephalosporin) before inflation of the tourniquet. Surgery begins on the more symptomatic side or on either side if neither knee is significantly worse than the other. The reason for starting on the more symptomatic side is in case surgery has to be discontinued after only one procedure owing to anesthetic considerations.

After the components have been implanted on the first side, the tourniquet is deflated and a second dose of intravenous antibiotic is administered (usually 500mg of a cephalosporin). After the joint capsule is closed and flexion against gravity is measured, one team completes the subcutaneous and skin closure on the first side while the other team inflates the second tourniquet and begins the exposure of the second side. When the second tourniquet is deflated, a third dose of antibiotic is given (usually 500mg of a cephalosporin for a total dose of 2g for both knees).

Because of concern about the potential for cross-contamination of the knee wounds when instruments used during the final stages of skin closure on the first knee are maintained on the field and used on the second knee, they should probably be handed off the field and outer surgical gloves changed.

Most patients will report after their complete recovery that they are glad they did both knees at the same time. A patient who has any uncertainty about proceeding with bilateral surgery should have only one knee done at a time. In many cases, the second side receives a “reprieve,” becoming more tolerable after the first side has been operated on.

To consider bilateral simultaneous knee replacement, both knees must have significant structural damage. It is best if the patient can't decide which knee is more bothersome. In borderline cases, ask the patient to pretend that the worse knee is normal and if so, would they be seeing you for consideration of knee replacement on the less involved side. If the answer to this question is “yes,” consider the patient a potential candidate for bilateral knee replacement. If the answer is “no,” recommend operating only on the worse knee, and expect that the operation on the second knee can probably be delayed for a considerable period of time.

Strong indications for bilateral simultaneous TKA are bilateral severe angular deformity, bilateral severe flexion contracture, and anesthesia difficulties, i.e., patients who are anatomically or medically difficult to anesthetise, such as some adult or juvenile rheumatoid arthritis patients or patients with severe ankylosing spondylitis.

Relative indications for bilateral simultaneous TKA include the need for multiple additional surgical procedures to achieve satisfactory function and financial or social considerations for the patient. Contraindications to bilateral TKA include medical infirmity (especially cardiac), a reluctant patient, and a patient with a very low pain threshold.

When performing bilateral simultaneous TKA, both limbs are prepped and draped at the same time. An initial dose of an intravenous antibiotic is given (usually 1 gram of a cephalosporin) before inflation of the tourniquet. Surgery begins on the more symptomatic side or on either side if neither knee is significantly worse than the other. The reason for starting on the more symptomatic side is in case surgery has to be discontinued after only one procedure owing to anesthetic considerations.

After the components have been implanted on the first side, the tourniquet is deflated and a second dose of intravenous antibiotic is administered (usually 500 mg of a cephalosporin). After the joint capsule is closed and flexion against gravity is measured, one team completes the subcutaneous and skin closure on the first side while the other team inflates the second tourniquet and begins the exposure of the second side. When the second tourniquet is deflated, a third dose of antibiotic is given (usually 500 mg of a cephalosporin for a total dose of 2 g for both knees).

Because of concern about the potential for cross-contamination of the knee wounds when instruments used during the final stages of skin closure on the first knee are maintained on the field and used on the second knee, they should probably be handed off the field and outer surgical gloves changed.

Most patients will report after their complete recovery that they are glad they did both knees at the same time. A patient who has any uncertainty about proceeding with bilateral surgery should have only one knee done at a time. In many cases, the second side receives a “reprieve,” becoming more tolerable after the first side has been operated on.

CURRENT INDICATIONS

The ideal patient for unicompartmental arthroplasty has been described as an elderly sedentary individual with significant joint space loss isolated to either the medial or lateral compartment. Angular deformity should be no more than 5 or 10 degrees off a neutral mechanical axis. Ideal weight is below 180 pounds. Pre-operative flexion contracture should be less than 15 degrees. At surgery, the anterior cruciate ligament is ideally intact and there is no evidence of inflammatory synovitis. (Kozinn, Scott, 1989) Indications for the procedure have broadened today because of the availability of less invasive operative techniques and more rapid recovery with UKA. Because of its conservative nature, the procedure is being thought of as a conservative first arthroplasty in the middle-aged patient. Because of its less invasive nature with more rapid recovery and potentially less medical morbidity, it is being considered as the “last arthroplasty” in the octogenarian or older.

There are basically 4 ways advocated to determine the proper femoral component rotation during TKA: (1) The Trans-epicondylar Axis, (2) Perpendicular to the “Whiteside Line,” (3) Three to five degrees of external rotation off the posterior condyles, and (4) Rotation of the component to a point where there is a balanced symmetric flexion gap. This last method is the most logical and functionally, the most appropriate. Of interest is the fact that the other 3 methods often yield flexion gap symmetry, but the surgeon should not be wed to any one of these individual methods at the expense of an unbalanced knee in flexion.

In correcting a varus knee, the knee is balanced first in extension by the appropriate medial release and then balanced in flexion by the appropriate rotation of the femoral component. In correcting a valgus knee, the knee can be balanced first in flexion by the femoral component rotation since balancing in extension almost never involves release of the lateral collateral ligament (LCL) but rather release of the lateral retinaculum. If a rare LCL release is anticipated for extension balancing, then it would be performed prior to determining the femoral rotation since the release may open up the lateral flexion gap to a point where even more femoral component rotation is needed to close down that lateral gap.

It is important to know and accept the fact that some knees will require internal rotation of the femoral component to yield flexion gap symmetry. The classic example of this is a knee that has previously undergone a valgus tibial osteotomy that has led to a valgus tibial joint line. In such a case, if any of the first 3 methods described above is utilised for femoral component rotation, it will lead to a knee that is very unbalanced in flexion being much tighter laterally than medially. A LCL release to open the lateral gap will be needed, increasing the complexity of the case. My experience has shown that intentional internal rotation of the femoral component when required is well-tolerated and rarely causes problems with patellar tracking. It is also of interest to note that mathematical calculations reveal that internally rotating a femoral component as much as 4 degrees will displace the trochlear groove no more that 2–3 mm (depending on the FC size), an amount easily compensated for by undersizing the patellar component and shifting it medially those few mm.

There are basically 3 ways to determine the proper tibial component rotation during TKA: (1) Anatomically cap the tibial cut surface with an asymmetric tibial component, (2) Align the tibial rotation relative to a fixed anatomic tibial landmark (most surgeons use this method and align relative to the medial aspect of the tibial tubercle), (3) Rotate the tibial component to a point where there is rotational congruency in extension between the femoral and tibial articulating surfaces. This third method must be used with fixed bearing arthroplasties (especially with conforming articulations) to avoid rotational incongruency between the components during weight-bearing that can create abnormal and deleterious torsional forces on posterior stabilised posts, insert tray interfaces and bone-cement interfaces. Rotating platform articulations can tolerate rotational mismatch unless it is to a point where the polyethylene insert rotates excessively and causes symptomatic soft tissue impingement.

Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty is growing in popularity. It appears to reduce blood loss, reduce hospital stay, improve post-operative quadriceps function and shorten post-operative recovery. We show our experience of minimally invasive TKA with a computer navigation system.

The first series compared forty MICA TKA and forty conventional computer assisted total knee arthroplasties (CATKA). Component positioning was assessed radiographically with long leg Maquet views. Knee Society Scores (KSS) were recorded pre-operatively and at 6, 12, 18 months. Length of stay and recovery of straight leg raise was also recorded. A second series of fifty MICATKA patients were assessed post-operatively for component alignment using long leg Maquet views. Twenty-two of these patients had assessment of femoral rotation using CT.

In the first series pre-operative KSS showed no significant difference between the two groups. Post-operatively the mean femoral component alignment was 89.7 degrees for MICATKA and 90.2 for CATKA. The mean tibial component alignment was 89.7 degrees for both. KSS at 6, 12, 18 months were statistically better in the MICATKA (p<000.1). Straight leg raise was achieved by day one in 93% of the MICATKA compared to 30% of the CATKA. Length of stay for MICATKA was a mean of 3.25 days with CATKA a mean of 6 days. In the second series the mean femoral component varus/valgus angle was 89.98 degrees, the mean tibial component varus/valgus angle was 89.91 degrees and the mean femoral component rotation was 0.6 degrees of external rotation.

MICATKA is a safe procedure with reproducible results. Alignment is equivalent to CATKA. It gives statistically significant improvement in KSS compared to the open procedure. The length of stay and time to straight leg raise are also reduced. At 2 years follow-up we have seen no revisions and no evidence of loosening radiographically.