How to assess femoral and tibial component rotation after total knee arthroplasty with computed tomography: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: One of the most important factors leading to revision of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) is malrotation of femoral and/or tibial component. Rotation measurements performed on radiographs are limited and less reliable compared to 2D computed tomography (CT). Nowadays, 2D-CT and 3D-CT can be distinguished in measuring rotation of the TKA components. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the most reliable CT techniques in measuring rotation of the TKA components and to investigate possible cut-off points that can be used in the clinician's decision for a possible revision of the TKA. METHODS: A search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science was performed up to April 2015. Final selections of 12 articles were used in this systematic review. RESULTS: 3D-CT, compared to 2D-CT, is more reliable and shows a high level of intra- and interobserver reliability. Femoral component rotation is measured using the component's posterior condylar line or inner pegs in relation to the epicondylar axis. Five different techniques were used to measure tibial component rotation. The posterior border of the tibial component in relationship to the geometric centre and tibial tubercle was most frequently used. CONCLUSION: This systematic review shows a strong preference for 3D-CT to determine the component's rotation following a TKA. The literature shows consensus on the reference points of the femoral component. In measurements of the tibial component, various techniques are used with similar results. No clear cut-off point for revision of malrotated TKA components can be stated because of limited evidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Preoperative patient and injury factors of successful rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with single-bundle techniques.

PURPOSE: The aim of this systematic review was to determine which patient determinants and injury factors, before anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by arthroscopic single-bundle techniques, affect postoperative rehabilitation. METHODS: A search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Clinical Trials was performed up to February 2013. After application of our inclusion criteria, a final selection was made based on studies' methodologic score assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analysis was planned for each prognostic factor when data were considered clinically and statistically homogeneous. RESULTS: Meta-analysis showed that male patients have better functional outcomes. Qualitative synthesis from 18 high-quality studies showed that patients operated on before 30 years of age reach higher activity levels. Patients with high baseline body mass index have lower activity levels after surgery. Smoking results in more symptoms and lower activity levels and subjective scores. Reconstruction before 3 months results in higher activity levels. Preoperatively, a less than 20% quadriceps strength difference, 50° of tibial external rotation or less, absence of flexion deficits, low knee influence on the patient's activity level, and less anterior knee pain result in higher functional scores. Preoperative anterior laxity difference does not predict functional scores. The prognostic value of preoperative activity and competition level for postoperative functional outcome is controversial. Patients with concomitant meniscal injuries have worse functional outcomes. The prognostic value of concomitant chondral pathology for postoperative functional outcome is controversial. Collateral ligament injury could predict functional scores or activity level. CONCLUSIONS: Male gender, patient age younger than 30 years, reconstruction before 3 months, and high baseline activity level contribute to better functional outcomes. Smoking, high body mass index, quadriceps strength, and range-of-motion deficits affect rehabilitation negatively. Preoperative anterior laxity does not influence rehabilitation. The role of preoperative prognostic injury factors remains unclear because of limited evidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of Level II and III studies.