Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 94-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1637 - 1640
1 Dec 2012
Clark DA Upadhyay N Gillespie G Wakeley C Eldridge JD

Ensuring correct rotation of the femoral component is a challenging aspect of patellofemoral replacement surgery. Rotation equal to the epicondylar axis or marginally more external rotation is acceptable. Internal rotation is associated with poor outcomes. This paper comprises two studies evaluating the use of the medial malleolus as a landmark to guide rotation.

We used 100 lower-leg anteroposterior radiographs to evaluate the reliability of the medial malleolus as a landmark. Assessment was made of the angle between the tibial shaft and a line from the intramedullary rod entry site to the medial malleolus. The femoral cut was made in ten cadaver knees using the inferior tip of the medial malleolus as a landmark for rotation. Rotation of the cut relative to the anatomical epicondylar axis was assessed using CT. The study of radiographs found the position of the medial malleolus relative to the tibial axis is consistent. Using the inferior tip of the medial malleolus in the cadaver study produced a mean external rotation of 1.6° (0.1° to 3.7°) from the anatomical epicondylar axis. Using the inferior tip of the medial malleolus to guide the femoral cutting jig avoids internal rotation and introduces an acceptable amount of external rotation of the femoral component.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 89-B, Issue 1 | Pages 45 - 49
1 Jan 2007
Ikeuchi M Yamanaka N Okanoue Y Ueta E Tani T

We prospectively assessed the benefits of using either a range-of-movement technique or an anatomical landmark method to determine the rotational alignment of the tibial component during total knee replacement. We analysed the cut proximal tibia intraoperatively, determining anteroposterior axes by the range-of-movement technique and comparing them with the anatomical anteroposterior axis.

We found that the range-of-movement technique tended to leave the tibial component more internally rotated than when anatomical landmarks were used. In addition, it gave widely variable results (mean 7.5°; 2° to 17°), determined to some extent by which posterior reference point was used. Because of the wide variability and the possibilities for error, we consider that it is inappropriate to use the range-of-movement technique as the sole method of determining alignment of the tibial component during total knee replacement.