Background
Kinematically aligned TKA restores function by aligning the femoral and tibial components to the normal or prearthritic joint lines of the knee. However, aligning the components to the ...joint lines of the normal knee also aligns the tibial component in varus, creating concern that varus alignment might result in poor function and early catastrophic failure.
Questions/Purposes
We therefore determined whether function and the incidence of catastrophic failure were different when the tibial component, knee, and limb alignment were in a specified normal range, varus outlier, or valgus outlier.
Methods
We prospectively followed all 198 patients (214 knees) who underwent TKAs between February and October 2008. We treated each knee in this cohort of patients with a kinematically aligned, cruciate-retaining prosthesis implanted using patient-specific guides. From a long-leg scanogram, we measured and categorized alignment of the tibial component as in range (≤ 0°) or a varus outlier (> 0°), alignment of the knee as in range (between −2.5° to −7.4° valgus) or a varus (> −2.5°) or valgus (< −7.4°) outlier, and alignment of the limb as in range (0° ± 3°) or a varus (> 3°) or valgus (< −3°) outlier. We assessed function using the Oxford Knee Score and WOMAC™ score, and reported catastrophic failure as the incidence of revision attributable to loosening, wear, and instability of the femoral or tibial components. The minimum followup was 31 months (mean, 38 months; range, 31–43 months).
Results
The mean Oxford Knee Score of 43 and WOMAC™ score of 92 were similar between the three alignment categories. The incidence of catastrophic failure in each alignment category was zero.
Conclusions
Kinematically aligned TKA restores function without catastrophic failure regardless of the alignment category. Because 75% of patients had their tibial component categorized as a varus outlier and also had high function and a zero incidence of catastrophic failure, the concern that kinematic alignment compromises function and places the components at a high risk for catastrophic failure is unfounded and should be of interest to surgeons committed to cutting the tibia perpendicular to the mechanical axis of the tibia.
Level of Evidence
Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Alignment in the varus or valgus outlier range of the tibial component, knee, and limb might adversely affect the long-term results of kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) particularly ...when patients are selected without restricting the degree of preoperative varus-valgus and flexion deformity.
A retrospective review of all patients treated in 2007 with a primary TKA determined the 10-year implant survivorship, yearly revision rate, Oxford Knee Score, and WOMAC. All 222 knees (217 patients) were aligned kinematically using patient-specific instrumentation without restricting the degree of preoperative deformity and with the restoration of the native joint lines and limb alignment. Mechanical alignment criteria categorized the alignments of the tibial component, knee, and limb as in-range or in a varus or valgus outlier range.
The implant survivorship (yearly revision rate) was 97.5% (0.3%) for revision for any reason and 98.4% (0.2%) for aseptic failure. The percentage postoperatively aligned in the varus outlier (valgus outlier) range was 78% (0%) for the angle between the tibial component and mechanical axis of the tibia, 31% (5%) for the tibiofemoral angle of the knee according to the criteria by Ritter et al, and 7% (21%) for the hip-knee-ankle angle of the limb according to the criteria by Parratte et al. Patients grouped in the varus outlier range, valgus outlier range, and in-range had similar implant survival and function scores. The 10-year Oxford Knee Score (48 best) and WOMAC (0 best) averaged 43 and 7 points, respectively.
With the limitation that a large case series unlikely represents the full range of preoperative deformities and native alignments, treatment of patients with kinematically aligned TKA with patient-specific instrumentation without restricting the preoperative deformity did not adversely affect the 10-year implant survival, yearly revision rate, and level of function.
Level III, therapeutic study.
Kinematic alignment performed with caliper measurements and verification checks accurately co-align the femoral and tibial components with the 3 axes and joint lines of the native knee without ...ligament release and without restrictions on the degree of preoperative varus, valgus, flexion, and extension deformities and the degree of postoperative correction. Orthopedics. 2019; 42(3):126-135..
Background Gap-balancing is an alignment method for total knee arthroplasty with the goal of creating uniform tension in the periarticular soft-tissue restraints and equal laxities throughout the arc ...of flexion. However, there is little evidence that achieving equal laxities prevents either overly tight or overly loose soft-tissue restraints after total knee arthroplasty. Accordingly, the purpose of the present study was to determine whether the laxities at 0°, 45°, and 90° of flexion are equal in the native knee. Methods Seven different laxities were measured at 0°, 45°, and 90° of flexion in ten fresh-frozen native cadaveric knees (with intact menisci, cartilage, and ligaments) by applying loads of ±5 Nm in varus-valgus rotation, ±3 Nm in internal-external rotation, 100 N in distraction, and ±45 N in anterior-posterior translation with use of a six-degrees-of-freedom load application system. Results The mean laxities (and standard deviations) at 45° of flexion were 1.7° ± 0.6° greater in varus, 0.9° ± 0.4° greater in valgus, 10.2° ± 2.7° greater in internal rotation, 10.1° ± 2.0° greater in external rotation, 1.7 ± 1.0 mm greater in distraction translation, and 3.3 ± 1.5 mm greater in anterior translation than those at 0° of flexion. The mean laxities at 90° of flexion were 2.5° ± 0.8° greater in varus, 1.0° ± 0.5° greater in valgus, 10.0° ± 4.6° greater in internal rotation, 10.1° ± 4.5° greater in external rotation, 1.8 ± 0.7 mm greater in distraction, and 1.6 ± 1.2 mm greater in anterior translation than those at 0° of flexion. The mean anterior translation at 90° of flexion was 1.7 ± 0.9 mm less than that at 45° of flexion. Conclusions Because five of the seven laxities were at least 1.7° or 1.6 mm greater at both 45° and 90° of flexion than those at 0° of flexion, the laxities of the native knee measured in this study are unequal at these flexion angles and therefore do not support the goal of gap-balancing in total knee arthroplasty. Clinical Relevance One possible disadvantage of changing the native laxities at 45° and 90° of flexion to match those at 0° of flexion in a total knee arthroplasty is the overly tight soft-tissue restraints relative to those of the native knee, which patients may perceive as pain, stiffness, and/or limited flexion.
Purpose
A systematic review was conducted to answer the following questions: (1) Does kinematically aligned (KA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) achieve clinical outcomes comparable to those of ...mechanically aligned (MA) TKA? (2) How do the limb, knee, and component alignments differ between KA and MA TKA? (3) How is joint line orientation angle (JLOA) changed from the native knee in KA TKA compared to that in MA TKA?
Methods
Nine full-text articles in English that reported the clinical and radiological outcomes of KA TKA were included. Five studies had a control group of patients who underwent MA TKA. Data on patient demographics, clinical scores, and radiological results were extracted. There were two level I, one level II, three level III, and three level IV studies. Six of the nine studies used patient-specific instrumentation, one study used computer navigation, and two studies used manual instrumentation.
Results
The clinical outcomes of KA TKA were comparable or superior to those of MA TKA with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Limb and knee alignment in KA TKA was similar to those in MA TKA, and component alignment showed slightly more varus in the tibial component and slightly more valgus in the femoral component. The JLOA in KA TKA was relatively parallel to the floor compared to that in the native knee and not oblique (medial side up and lateral side down) compared to that in MA TKA. The implant survivorship and complication rate of the KA TKA were similar to those of the MA TKA.
Conclusion
Similar or better clinical outcomes were produced by using a KA TKA at early-term follow-up and the component alignment differed from that of MA TKA. KA TKA seemed to restore function without catastrophic failure regardless of the alignment category up to midterm follow-up. The JLOA in KA TKA was relatively parallel to the floor similar to the native knee compared to that in MA TKA. The present review of nine published studies suggests that relatively new kinematic alignment is an acceptable and alternative alignment to mechanical alignment, which is better understood. Further validation of these findings requires more randomized clinical trials with longer follow-up.
Level of evidence
Level II.
Kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty (KA TKA) strives to restore the native left to right symmetry of the lower limb; however, the reproducibility of achieving this target is unknown. The ...present study determined the proportion of patients with left to right symmetry and the improvement in patient-reported function after calipered KA TKA.
A review of 562 postoperative scanograms identified 102 patients (53 women) with a KA TKA in one limb, no other skeletal abnormalities in either limb, and symmetrical rotation between limbs on the scanogram. All patients were treated with primary TKA that used caliper measurement of the thicknesses of the femoral bone and tibial bone resections to kinematically align the components. The hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle, distal lateral femoral angle (DLFA), and proximal medial tibial angle (PMTA) were measured. Patient-reported Oxford Knee Score (OKS) measured preoperative and postoperative functions.
The proportion of patients with a difference in the HKA angle, DLFA, and PMTA between limbs within ±3°, >3° varus, and <−3° valgus was 95%, 2%, and 3%, respectively, for the HKA angle; 97%, 1%, and 2%, respectively, for the DLFA; and 97%, 2%, and 1%, respectively, for the PMTA. The mean OKS improved from 20 preoperatively to 44 points (range 18-48 points) at 15 months postoperatively.
Calipered KA TKA restored native left to right symmetry of the HKA angle, DLFA, and PMTA in nearly all patients with negligible risk of varus alignment of the tibial component with respect to the native tibial joint line. The mean postoperative OKS indicated clinically important improvement in patient-reported function.
Purpose
Performing kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with generic instruments is less costly than patient-specific instrumentation; however, the alignment and function with this new ...technique are unknown.
Methods
One hundred and one consecutive patients (101 knees) treated with kinematically aligned TKA, implanted with use of generic instruments, were prospectively followed. The medial collateral ligament was not released. The lateral collateral ligament was released in the 17 % of patients with a fixed valgus deformity. Six measures of alignment were categorized from a scanogram of the extremity, an axial scan of the knee, and an intraoperative measurement. Both the Oxford Knee and WOMAC™ scores were assessed as function. High function was a mean Oxford Knee score >41.
Results
The frequency that patients were categorized as in-range was 93 % for the mechanical alignment of the limb (0° ± 3°), 94 % for the joint line (−3° ± 3°), 57 % for the anatomic axis of the knee (−2.5° ± −7.4° valgus), 4 % for the varus–valgus rotation of the tibial component (≤0° valgus), 98 % for the rotation of the tibial component with respect to the femoral component (0° ± 10°), and 94 % for the intraoperative change in the anterior–posterior distance of the tibia with respect to the femur at 90° of flexion (0 ± 2 mm). The mean OKS score was 42, and WOMAC™ score was 89. For each alignment, the function was the same for patients categorized as an outlier or in-range.
Conclusions
The authors prefer the use of generic instruments to perform kinematically aligned TKA in place of mechanically aligned TKA because five of six alignments were accurate and because high function was restored regardless of whether patients had an alignment categorized as an outlier or in-range.
Level of evidence
IV.
Purpose
The present study determined the postoperative phenotypes after unrestricted calipered kinematically aligned (KA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA), whether any phenotypes were associated with ...reoperation, implant revision, and lower outcome scores at 4 years, and whether the proportion of TKAs within each phenotype was comparable to those of the nonarthritic contralateral limb.
Methods
From 1117 consecutive primary TKAs treated by one surgeon with unrestricted calipered KA, an observer identified all patients (
N
= 198) that otherwise had normal paired femora and tibiae on a long-leg CT scanogram. In both legs, the distal femur–mechanical axis angle (FMA), proximal tibia–mechanical axis angle (TMA), and the hip–knee–ankle angle (HKA) were measured. Each alignment angle was assigned to one of Hirschmann’s five FMA, five TMA, and seven HKA phenotype categories.
Results
Three TKAs (1.5%) underwent reoperation for anterior knee pain or patellofemoral instability in the subgroup of patients with the more valgus phenotypes. There were no implant revisions for component loosening, wear, or tibiofemoral instability. The median Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) was similar between phenotypes. The median Oxford Knee Score (OKS) was similar between the TMA and HKA phenotypes and greatest in the most varus FMA phenotype. The phenotype proportions after calipered KA TKA were comparable to the contralateral leg.
Conclusion
Unrestricted calipered KA’s restoration of the wide range of phenotypes did not result in implant revision or poor FJS and OKS scores at a mean follow-up of 4 years. The few reoperated patients had a more valgus setting of the prosthetic trochlea than recommended for mechanical alignment. Designing a femoral component specifically for KA that restores patellofemoral kinematics with all phenotypes, especially the more valgus ones, is a strategy for reducing reoperation risk.
Level of evidence
Therapeutic, Level III
Purpose
Tibial insert conformity in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is of interest due to the potential effect on tibiofemoral kinematics. This study determined differences in anterior–posterior ...movements of the femoral condyles, pivot locations, and internal tibial rotation in different arcs of flexion for two implants with different insert conformities in kinematically aligned TKA.
Methods
Twenty-five patients treated with a medial and lateral low-conforming, posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) retaining (LC CR) implant followed by a medial ball-in-socket and flat, lateral PCL sacrificing (B-in-S CS) implant in the contralateral knee underwent single-plane fluoroscopy during a deep knee bend. Analysis following 3D-to-2D image registration determined tibiofemoral kinematics and patients completed validated outcome scores for both knees.
Results
The mean follow-up of 1.6 ± 0.4 years for the knee with the B-in-S CS implant was shorter than the 2.7 ± 1.2 years for the LC CR implant. From 0º to 30º of flexion, a medial pivot occurred with the tibia rotating internally approximately 5º with both implants. From 30º to 90º, the pivot remained medial and internal rotation increased to 10º with the B-in-S CS implant. In contrast, neither femoral condyle moved more than 1 mm with the LC CR implant from 30º to 60º, but from 60º to 90º degrees, a lateral pivot occurred and internal rotation increased. Internal rotation of the tibia on the femur from 0° to maximum flexion occurred about a medial pivot similar to the native knee for the B-in-S CS implant and was 4.5° greater than that of the LC CR implant (10.4° vs 5.9°). There was no difference in the median patient-reported outcome scores between implant designs.
Conclusions
Tibial insert conformity is a primary determinant of a medial or lateral pivot during a deep knee bend. One explanation for the transition from a medial to lateral pivot between 30º and 60º with the LC CR implant is the chock-block effect of the insert’s posterolateral upslope which impedes posterior movement of the lateral femoral condyle. Because there is no posterolateral upslope in the insert of the B-in-S CS implant, the tibia pivots medially throughout flexion similar to the native knee.
Level of evidence
Level III.
PDF
