Primary osteoarthritic knees have more varus coronal alignment of the femur compared to young non-arthritic knees in a large cohort study.

PURPOSE: Many surgeons are performing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with an aim to reproducing native anatomical coronal alignment. Yet, it remains unclear if primary osteoarthritic and non-osteoarthritic populations have similar knee coronal alignment. This study aims to describe and compare the distribution of femoral and tibial coronal alignment in a large primary osteoarthritic cohort and a young non-osteoarthritic cohort. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of a monocentric prospectively gathered data, from 1990 to 2019, of 2859 consecutive primary osteoarthritic knees in 2279 patients. Patients underwent standardized long-leg radiographs. Femoral mechanical angle (FMA) and tibial mechanical angle (TMA) were digitally measured using software. Femoral, tibial and knee phenotypes were analyzed, and descriptive data were reported. Data were compared to a young non-osteoarthritic population previously described. RESULTS: In osteoarthritic knees, the mean FMA was 91° ± 2.9° (range 86°-100°) and the mean TMA was 87° ± 3.1° (range 80°-94°). No significant difference was observed for FMA and TMA between genders. The most common femoral and tibial phenotypes were varus (38.7%) and neutral (37.1%). The most frequent knee phenotype was a varus femoral phenotype with a neutral tibial phenotype (15.5%), which is different to the non-osteoarthritic population. CONCLUSION: This study showed the wide distribution of knee phenotypes in a large osteoarthritic cohort. There was more varus distribution of the femoral coronal alignment compared to a non-osteoarthritic population, suggesting consideration and potential adaptation of the realignment strategy of the femoral component during TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Phenotyping the knee in young non-osteoarthritic knees shows a wide distribution of femoral and tibial coronal alignment.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of knowledge about the joint line orientation of the femur and tibia in non-osteoarthritic knees. The primary purpose of the present study was to evaluate the orientation of the joint lines in native non-osteoarthritic knees using 3D-reconstructed CT scans. The secondary purpose was to identify knee phenotypes to combine the information of the femoral and tibial alignment. METHODS: A total of 308 non-osteoarthritic knees of 160 patients (male to female ratio = 102:58, mean age ± standard deviation 30 ± 7 years (16-44 years) were retrospectively included from our registry. All patients received CT of the knee according to the Imperial Knee Protocol. The orientation of the femoral and tibial joint line was measured in relation to their mechanical axis (femoral mechanical angle, FMA, and tibial mechanical angle, TMA) using a commercially planning software (KneePLAN 3D, Symbios, Yverdon les Bains, Switzerland). The values of FMA and TMA were compared between males and females. Descriptive statistics, such as means, ranges, and measures of variance (e.g. standard deviations), were presented. Based on these results, phenotypes were introduced for the femur and tibia. These phenotypes, based on FMA and TMA values, consist of a mean value and cover a range of ± 1.5° from this mean (3° increments). The distribution of femoral and tibial phenotypes, and their combinations (knee phenotypes) were calculated for the total group and for both genders. RESULTS: The overall mean FMA ± standard deviation (SD) was 93.4° ± 2.0° and values ranged from 87.9° varus to 100° valgus. The overall mean TMA ± SD was 87.2° ± 2.4° with a range of 81.3° varus to 94.6° valgus. FMA and TMA showed significant gender differences (p < 0.01). Females showed more valgus alignment than males. The most common femoral phenotype was neutral in both genders. The most common tibial phenotype was neutral in the male knees (62.8%) and valgus (41.6%) in the female knees. In males, the most frequent combination (knee phenotype) was a neutral phenotype in the femur and a neutral phenotype in the tibia (25.6%). In females, it was a neutral femoral phenotype and a valgus tibial phenotype (28.3%). CONCLUSION: 3D-reconstructed CT scans confirmed the great variability of the joint line orientation in non-osteoarthritic knees. The introduced femoral and tibial phenotypes enable the evaluation of the femoral and tibial alignment together (knee phenotypes). The variability of knee phenotypes found in this young non-osteoarthritic population clearly shows the need for a more individualized approach in TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Highly variable coronal tibial and femoral alignment in osteoarthritic knees: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of knowledge about coronal alignment variability in osteoarthritic knees. Therefore, the purpose of this article was to systematically review the literature and collect data about the lower limb alignment including hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), femoral mechanical angle (FMA), tibial mechanical angle (TMA) and the joint line convergence angle (JLCA) in osteoarthritic knees. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using the electronic databases MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE and Google Scholar. The following keywords were used: (morphology OR geometr* OR anatomy OR alignment OR phenotypes), (coronal OR neutral OR varus OR valgus), (knee OR lower limb OR femur OR tibia) and (osteoarthritis OR arthritis). Out of 110 full-text articles retrieved, 15 studies were included. Demographic information included author's names, year of publication, imaging modality, sample size and patient demographics (i.e. sex, age, etc.). Descriptive statistics, such as means, ranges, and measures of variance [e.g. standard deviations, 95% confidence intervals (CI)] for all angles (HKA, FMA, TMA, JLCA) are presented. RESULTS: Thirteen studies reported mean overall HKA angles ranging from 163.5° ± 2.3° to 179.9° ± 4.8°. The mean HKA angles in females were between 164.1° ± 7.2° and 178.8° ± 4.8°, and in males between 163.4° ± 5.5° and 177.4° ± 3.9°. The lowest and highest reported HKA angles were - 27.7° and + 22.0°, respectively. Seven studies reported mean FMA angles. Mean values ranged from 92.7° ± 2.7° valgus to 88.6° ± 2° varus. The reported mean FMAs for male were 87.9° ± 0.5° to 90.7° ± 3° and for female 89.91° ± 2.8° to 92.9° ± 3.1°. Six studies reported mean TMA values. TMA ranged from 81.7° ± 3.9° varus to 87.7° ± 4.1° varus. Only three studies reported mean JLCA angles, which ranged from - 4.3° to - 6.4° ± 3.8°. CONCLUSION: Osteoarthritic knees showed a huge variation in overall coronal limb alignment as well as in femoral and tibial coronal alignment. Current total knee arthroplasty (TKA) alignment philosophies and preoperative planning do not sufficiently consider these variation, which might be one reason for unhappy knees after TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, systematic review.

Native non-osteoarthritic knees have a highly variable coronal alignment: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Coronal alignment of the knee is defined by the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), the femoral mechanical angle (FMA), the tibial mechanical angle (TMA), and the joint line convergence angle (JLCA). To date, there is still a lack of knowledge about the variability of native coronal knee alignment. The purpose of this paper is to present a systematic review of the current literature about the variability of coronal knee alignment (HKA, FMA, TMA, and JLCA) in non-osteoarthritic knees. METHODS: The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched from database inception to search date (November 1, 2018) and screened for relevant studies. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Inclusion criteria were studies that reported the coronal alignment of the native, non-osteoarthritic knee. RESULTS: A total of 15 studies met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies performed the measurements on weight-bearing long-leg standing radiographs (LLR), one study used MRI, and one study used the EOS imaging system. The mean HKA ranged from 176.7° ± 2.8° (male) to 180.7° (female). The mean FMA ranged from 92.08° ± 1.78° (female) to 97.2° ± 2.7° (female). The mean TMA ranged from 84.6° ± 2.5° (female) to 89.6° (female). The mean JLCA ranged from - 0.47° ± 0.98° (male) to - 1.9° ± 1.4° (female). CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides a detailed overview about the variability of the coronal knee alignment in non-osteoarthritic knees. The broad variability of all coronal alignment parameters highlights the necessity for a more anatomic and individualized approach in knee arthroplasty. It also offers the fundament to understand the changes in osteoarthritic knees. LEVEL OF CLINICAL EVIDENCE: Systematic review, Level IV.

Coronal alignment classes after robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty are not associated with variation in patient-reported outcome measurements: A single-center cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were (1) to use three-dimensional computed tomography (3DCT) measurements to determine whether patients undergoing imageless robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) develop a variety of postoperative distal femoral mechanical angle (FMA), proximal tibial mechanical angle (TMA), and hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) phenotypes as described by Hirschmann et al, and (2) to compare postoperative patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) between these phenotypes. METHOD: Fifty patients with knee osteoarthritis underwent RA-TKA. All surgeries were performed using bicruciate-stabilized TKA. In each case, the postoperative HKA, FMA and TMA were classified into one of Hirschmann's five FMA, five TMA, and seven HKA phenotype categories. We investigated how these phenotypes affected patient satisfaction, 2011 Knee Society Score (KSS) subscale scores, the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) score, and patella scores with anterior knee pain at a mean of 15.1 months after RA-TKA. RESULTS: Coronal alignment angles were assigned to three FMA, four TMA, and five HKA phenotypes. The most common FMA, TMA, and HKA phenotypes were valgus FMA 3° (58%), valgus TMA 3° (60%), and varus HKA 3° (38%). The FMA, TMA, and HKA phenotypes showed no significant differences in any PROMs. CONCLUSIONS: RA-TKA led to various HKA, FMA and TMA phenotypes in the coronal plane, none of which affected PROMs.

Surgical epicondylar axis is not orthogonal to the femoral mechanical knee axis in valgus knees with primary osteoarthritis: Three-dimensional analysis according to knee coronal alignment in 112 patients.

BACKGROUND: During total knee arthroplasty (TKA), most surgeons align the femoral component along the surgical epicondylar axis (SEA) considering it as orthogonal to the femoral mechanical axis. However, it is still unclear how SEA coronal alignment varies according to the native coronal knee alignment. The main goal of this study was to analyze the SEA orientation according to the native coronal knee morphotype. METHODS: A total of 112 patients underwent a three-dimensional (3D) -planning-based TKA. The SEA was then determined by locating the epicondyles on 3D models. The 3D femoral and tibial mechanical axes were marked and the femoral (FMA) and tibial (TMA) mechanical angles were measured. The native HKA angle was measured as FMA + TMA. The SEA orientation angles were measured in the coronal (SEA-α) and axial (SEA-ß) plane. SEA orientation was compared between the valgus, neutral, and varus knees. RESULTS: The mean SEA-α angle was 90.2 ± 3° and the mean axial SEA-ß angle was 92.2 ± 1.3°. The SEA-α angle was significantly higher in the valgus group compared with the neutral group (92.3 ± 2.9°, 90 ± 2.9°, P = 0.0009) whereas there was no significant difference in the SEA-α angle between the varus and the neutral group (89.7 ± 2.3°, 90 ± 2.9°, P = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to the neutral and varus knees, the SEA was not orthogonal to the femoral mechanical axis in patients undergoing TKA for primary osteoarthritis. Our results suggest adapting the coronal alignment of the femoral component during TKA, while maintaining an average 2° valgus in valgus knees. By contrast, with varus and neutral knees, our data support the use of a mechanical alignment.