Aims. The Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification has been developed to predict individual variations in inherent knee alignment. The impact of preoperative and postoperative CPAK classification phenotype on the postoperative clinical outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains elusive. This study aimed to examine the effect of postoperative CPAK classification phenotypes (I to IX), and their pre- to postoperative changes on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Methods. A questionnaire was administered to 340 patients (422 knees) who underwent primary TKA for osteoarthritis (OA) between September 2013 and June 2019. A total of 231 patients (284 knees) responded. The ­Knee Society Score 2011 (KSS 2011), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-12 (KOOS-12), and Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) were used to assess clinical outcomes. Using preoperative and postoperative anteroposterior full-leg radiographs, the arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA) and joint line obliquity (JLO) were calculated and classified based on the CPAK classification. To investigate the impact on PROMs, multivariable regression analyses using stepwise selection were conducted, considering factors such as age at surgery, time since surgery, BMI, sex, implant use, postoperative aHKA classification, JLO classification, and changes in aHKA and JLO classifications from preoperative to postoperative. Results. The preoperative and postoperative CPAK classifications were predominantly phenotype I (155 knees; 55%) and phenotype V (73 knees; 26%), respectively. The change in the preoperative to postoperative aHKA classification was a significant negative predictive factor for KOOS-12 and FJS-12, while postoperative apex proximal JLO was a significant negative predictive factor for KSS 2011 and KOOS-12. Conclusion. In primary TKA for OA, preoperative and postoperative CPAK phenotypes were associated with PROMs. Alteration in varus/valgus alignment from preoperative to postoperative was recognized as a negative predictive factor for both KOOS-12 and FJS-12. Moreover, the postoperative apex proximal JLO was identified as a negative factor for KSS 2011 and KOOS-12. Determining the target alignment for each preoperative phenotype with reproducibility could improve PROMs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1059–1066

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

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

The aim of this study was to investigate the distribution of phenotypes in Asian patients with end-stage osteoarthritis (OA) and assess whether the phenotype affected the clinical outcome and survival of mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We also compared the survival of the group in which the phenotype unintentionally remained unchanged with those in which it was corrected to neutral.

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.