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.

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 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.

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

The aim of this study was to compare any differences in the primary outcome (biphasic flexion knee moment during gait) of robotic arm-assisted bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) with conventional mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at one year post-surgery.

Evaluating musculoskeletal conditions of the lower limb and understanding the pathophysiology of complex bone kinematics is challenging. Static images do not take into account the dynamic component of relative bone motion and muscle activation. Fluoroscopy and dynamic MRI have important limitations. Dynamic CT (4D-CT) is an emerging alternative that combines high spatial and temporal resolution, with an increased availability in clinical practice. 4D-CT allows simultaneous visualization of bone morphology and joint kinematics. This unique combination makes it an ideal tool to evaluate functional disorders of the musculoskeletal system. In the lower limb, 4D-CT has been used to diagnose femoroacetabular impingement, patellofemoral, ankle and subtalar joint instability, or reduced range of motion. 4D-CT has also been used to demonstrate the effect of surgery, mainly on patellar instability. 4D-CT will need further research and validation before it can be widely used in clinical practice. We believe, however, it is here to stay, and will become a reference in the diagnosis of lower limb conditions and the evaluation of treatment options.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(5):822–827.

Aims

The goal of the current systematic review was to assess the impact of implant placement accuracy on outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Aims

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using functional alignment aims to implant the components with minimal compromise of the soft-tissue envelope by restoring the plane and obliquity of the non-arthritic joint. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of TKA with functional alignment on mediolateral soft-tissue balance as assessed using intraoperative sensor-guided technology.

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

The application of robotics in the operating theatre for knee arthroplasty remains controversial. As with all new technology, the introduction of new systems might be associated with a learning curve. However, guidelines on how to assess the introduction of robotics in the operating theatre are lacking. This systematic review aims to evaluate the current evidence on the learning curve of robot-assisted knee arthroplasty. An extensive literature search of PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library was conducted. Randomized controlled trials, comparative studies, and cohort studies were included. Outcomes assessed included: time required for surgery, stress levels of the surgical team, complications in regard to surgical experience level or time needed for surgery, size prediction of preoperative templating, and alignment according to the number of knee arthroplasties performed. A total of 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most were of medium to low quality. The operating time of robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is associated with a learning curve of between six to 20 cases and six to 36 cases respectively. Surgical team stress levels show a learning curve of seven cases in TKA and six cases for UKA. Experience with the robotic systems did not influence implant positioning, preoperative planning, and postoperative complications. Robot-assisted TKA and UKA is associated with a learning curve regarding operating time and surgical team stress levels. Future evaluation of robotics in the operating theatre should include detailed measurement of the various aspects of the total operating time, including total robotic time and time needed for preoperative planning. The prior experience of the surgical team should also be evaluated and reported.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(4):407–413.

Aims

To compare patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with ≤ 80° range of movement (ROM) operated with a 2 mm increase in the flexion gap with matched non-stiff patients with at least 100° of preoperative ROM and balanced flexion and extension gaps.

Aims

This prospective randomised controlled trial was designed to evaluate the outcome of both the MRI- and CT-based patient-specific matched guides (PSG) from the same manufacturer.

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

There are two techniques widely used to determine the rotational alignment of the components in total knee arthroplasty (TKA); gap balancing (GB) and measured resection (MR). Which technique is the best remains controversial. We aimed to investigate this in a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Instability is a common indication for early revision after both primary and revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA), accounting for up to 20% in the literature. The number of TKAs performed annually continues to climb exponentially, thus having an effective algorithm for treatment is essential. This relies on a thorough pre- and intra-operative assessment of the patient. The underlying cause of the instability must be identified initially and subsequently, the surgeon must be able to balance the flexion and extension gaps and be comfortable using a variety of constrained implants.

This review describes the assessment of the unstable TKA, and the authors’ preferred form of treatment for these difficult cases where the source of instability is often multifactorial.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):116–19.

We conducted a meta-analysis, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies, to examine the effect of patient-specific instruments (PSI) on radiological outcomes after total knee replacement (TKR) including: mechanical axis alignment and malalignment of the femoral and tibial components in the coronal, sagittal and axial planes, at a threshold of > 3º from neutral. Relative risks (RR) for malalignment were determined for all studies and for RCTs and cohort studies separately.

Of 325 studies initially identified, 16 met the eligibility criteria, including eight RCTs and eight cohort studies. There was no significant difference in the likelihood of mechanical axis malalignment with PSI versus conventional TKR across all studies (RR = 0.84, p = 0.304), in the RCTs (RR = 1.14, p = 0.445) or in the cohort studies (RR = 0.70, p = 0.289). The results for the alignment of the tibial component were significantly worse using PSI TKR than conventional TKR in the coronal and sagittal planes (RR = 1.75, p = 0.028; and RR = 1.34, p = 0.019, respectively, on pooled analysis). PSI TKR showed a significant advantage over conventional TKR for alignment of the femoral component in the coronal plane (RR = 0.65, p = 0.028 on pooled analysis), but not in the sagittal plane (RR = 1.12, p = 0.437). Axial alignment of the tibial (p = 0.460) and femoral components (p = 0.127) was not significantly different.

We conclude that PSI does not improve the accuracy of alignment of the components in TKR compared with conventional instrumentation.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:1052–61.

The advent of computer-assisted knee replacement surgery has focused interest on the alignment of the components. However, there is confusion at times between the alignment of the limb as a whole and that of the components. The interaction between them is discussed in this article. Alignment is expressed relative to some reference axis or plane and measurements will vary depending on what is selected as the reference. The validity of different reference axes is discussed. Varying prosthetic alignment has direct implications for surrounding soft-tissue tension. In this context the interaction between alignment and soft-tissue balance is explored and the current knowledge of the relationship between alignment and outcome is summarised.

The purpose of this study was to measure the radiological parameters of femoral component alignment of the Oxford Phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR), and evaluate their effect on clinical outcome. Multiple regression analysis was used to examine the relative contributions of the radiological assessment of femoral component alignment in 189 consecutive UKRs performed by a single surgeon. The American Knee Society scores were compared between groups, defined as being within or outside recommended tolerances of the position of the femoral component. For the flexion/extension position 21 UKRs (11.1%) lay outside the recommended limits, and for posterior overhang of the femoral component nine (4.8%) lay outside the range. The pre-operative hip/knee/ankle (HKA) angle, narrowest canal distance from the distal femoral entry point of the alignment jig and coronal entry-point position had significant effects on the flexion/extension position. Pre-operative HKA angle had a significant influence on posterior overhang of the femoral component. However, there was no significant difference in American Knee Society scores relative to the position of the femoral component.