The restoration of knee alignment is an important goal during total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In the past surgeons aimed to restore neutral limb alignment during surgery. However, previous studies have demonstrated alignment to be dynamic, varying depending on the position of the limb and the degree of weight-bearing, and between patients. We used a validated computer navigation system to measure the femorotibial mechanical angle (FTMA) in 264 knees in 77 male and 55 female healthy volunteers aged 18 to 35 years (mean 26.2). We found the mean supine alignment to be a varus angle of 1.2° (standard deviation (sd) 4), with few patients having neutral alignment. FTMA differs significantly between males and females (with a mean varus of 1.7° (sd 4) and 0.4° (sd 3.9), respectively; p = 0.008). It changes significantly with posture, the knee hyperextending by a mean of 5.6°, and coronal plane alignment becoming more varus by 2.2° (sd 3.6) on standing compared with supine.

Knee alignment is different in different individuals and is dynamic in nature, changing with different postures. This may have implications for the assessment of alignment in TKA, which is achieved in non-weight-bearing conditions and which may not represent the situation observed during weight-bearing.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:498–502

We compared lower limb coronal alignment measurements obtained pre- and post-operatively with long-leg radiographs and computer navigation in patients undergoing primary total knee replacement (TKR). A series of 185 patients had their pre- and post-implant radiological and computer-navigation system measurements of coronal alignment compared using the Bland-Altman method. The study included 81 men and 104 women with a mean age of 68.5 years (32 to 87) and a mean body mass index of 31.7 kg/m² (19 to 49). Pre-implant Bland–Altman limits of agreement were -9.4° to 8.6° with a repeatability coefficient of 9.0°. The Bland–Altman plot showed a tendency for the radiological measurement to indicate a higher level of pre-operative deformity than the corresponding navigation measurement. Post-implant limits of agreement were -5.0° to 5.4° with a repeatability coefficient of 5.2°. The tendency for valgus knees to have greater deformity on the radiograph was still seen, but was weaker for varus knees.

The alignment seen or measured intra-operatively during TKR is not necessarily the same as the deformity seen on a standing long-leg radiograph either pre- or post-operatively. Further investigation into the effect of weight-bearing and surgical exposure of the joint on the mechanical femorotibial angle is required to enable the most appropriate intra-operative alignment to be selected.

There have been many reports which suggest that in patients with tibiofemoral osteoarthritis, a reduction in joint space is demonstrated better on weight-bearing radiographs taken with the knee in semiflexion than in full extension. The reduction has been attributed to the loss of articular cartilage in the contact area in a semiflexed arthritic knee. None of these studies have, however, included normal knees. We have therefore undertaken a prospective, double-blind, randomised study in order to evaluate the difference in the joint-space of arthroscopically-proven normal tibiofemoral joints as seen on weight-bearing full-extension and 30° flexion posteroanterior radiographs. Twenty-two knees were evaluated and the results showed that there may be a difference of up to 2 mm in the two views. This difference could be attributed to the inherent differential thickness of the articular cartilage in different areas of the femoral and tibial condyles and a change in the areas of contact between them.