ABSTRACT
Purpose: The Knee Society Scoring System (KSS) is a frequently used outcome score which quantifies functional patients' outcomes before and after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Several problems arise when trying to implement KSS for obtaining postoperative outcomes after more personalised aligned TKAs. Scoring for valgus femorotibial angle (FTA) intervals outside moderate ranges is often poorly explained, the specific version of KSS used for outcome collection is frequently unclear and the exact measuring methods are typically not described in the literature. The aims of this systematic review were to investigate the latest user practice, the application of KSS and its limitations after kinematically aligned (KA) TKA. Methods: A systematic literature search following PRISMA guidelines was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Medline and Scopus to identify potentially relevant articles for this review, published from the beginning of January 2013 until the end of January 2023. Broad Mesh terms such as 'kinematic alignment', 'total knee arthroplasty' and 'knee society score' were used for building search strategy in each database accordingly. Articles reporting postoperative values of the objective surgeon-assessed KSS after KA TKA or KA and mechanically aligned TKA were included. For assessing included randomised control trials (RCTs), an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's design-specific scale for assessing RCTs was used. The non-RCTs were assessed by using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool. The Ottawa-Newcastle Score system was also used. Studies were additionally evaluated for their radiological methodology by using a five-question checklist (Radiological Assessment Qualit criteria). Results: The initial search identified 167 studies, of which 129 were considered for screening. Ten studies reporting outcomes after KA TKA did not use the objective surgeon-assessed part of KSS for clinical outcome measurement, and 30 studies reporting outcomes after KA TKA did not use KSS at all for clinical and/or functional outcomes. From the 10 included studies, only six have used the latest KSS score (2011), the rest using its 1989 variant; and out of these six studies, only two presented values of the FTA, which is needed for calculating the KSS's 'alignment' subcomponent, the rest presenting hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) values. Additionally, when converting these HKA values to FTA intervals, the authors of this systematic review found that KA TKA FTA intervals display limits, which tend to be outside the 'well-scored' KSS anatomical alignment interval. Conclusion: The inconsistent and nonstandardised use of the surgeon-assessed KSS across studies reviewed compromises assessment reliability and patient outcome scores. To enhance precision and comparability, it is crucial to standardise the KSS application, incorporating personalised alignment strategies for more accurate patient evaluations. Level of Evidence: Level III.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A comprehensive exploration evaluating left-to-right knee symmetry across all anatomical planes utilizing three-dimensional (3D) scans stands absent from the existing body of research. Therefore, the primary objectives of this investigation involved examining potential differences and resemblances in alignment and structure between left and right non-osteoarthritic (native) knees in various planes (coronal, sagittal, and axial) using three-dimensional single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) images. METHODS: A total of 282 native knees from 141 patients were retrospectively gathered from the hospital's records. Patients, aged between 16 and 45, who underwent Tc99m-methyl diphosphonate SPECT/CT scans for both knees, adhering to the Imperial Knee Protocol, were included. A statistical analysis was conducted, including 23 knee morphometric parameters, comparing left and right knees, and classifying them based on functional knee phenotypes across the coronal, sagittal, and axial planes. RESULTS: Regarding the functional coronal knee phenotype, 26% of patients (n = 37) exhibited identical phenotypes in both knees (p < 0.001). Significant correlated similarities between the left and right knees were observed in the coronal plane (Pearson's r = 0.76, 0.68, 0.76, 0.76, p < 0.001) and in several morphometric measures in the sagittal plane (Pearson's r = 0.92, 0.72, 0.64, p < 0.001). Moderately correlated similarities were noted in the axial plane (Pearson's r = 0.43, 0.44, 0.43, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Only 26% of native knees exhibit an identical coronal phenotype in their contralateral knee, whereas 67% have the adjacent coronal phenotype. Strongly correlated resemblances were established across various left and right knee morphometric parameters in the coronal, sagittal, and axial planes. These findings could enhance decisions in procedures like total knee arthroplasties or osteotomies, where alignment is key to outcomes, and reveal a potential for future artificial intelligence-driven models to improve our understanding and improve personalized treatment strategies for knee osteoarthritis.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To investigate the correlation between postoperative limb/component alignments and clinical/functional outcomes following medial unicondylar knee arthroplasty (mUKA). METHODS: Inclusion criteria included peer-reviewed English- or German-language publications assessing postoperative limb or implant alignment and clinical outcomes of mUKA. Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) was used to assess article quality. RESULTS: A total of 2767 knees from 2604 patients were evaluated. Significant correlations were observed between postoperative limb/component alignments and clinical/functional outcomes after mUKA. Inferior outcomes were associated with lower placement and excessive valgus alignment of the tibia component (> 3°). A recommended external rotation of 4°-5° was identified for the tibia component, with specific cut-off values for the femoral and tibia components. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal outcomes in mUKA were associated with a varus coronal limb alignment. The tibia implant component performed well within a specific alignment range. An exact external rotation value was recommended for the tibia component, while internal rotation correlated negatively with the femoral component. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (level IV retrospective case series were included).
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to report the clinical and functional outcomes, complication rates, implant survivorship and the progression of tibiofemoral osteoarthritis (OA), after new inlay or onlay patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA), for isolated patellofemoral OA. Comparison of different implant types and models, where it was possible, also represented one of the objectives. METHODS: A systematic literature search following PRISMA guidelines was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Cochrane databases, to identify possible relevant studies, published from the inception of these databases until 11.11.2022. Randomized control trials (RCTs), case series, case control studies and cohort studies, written in English or German, and published in peer-reviewed journals after 2010, were included. Not original studies, case reports, simulation studies, systematic reviews, or studies that included patients who underwent TKA or unicompartmental arthroplasty (UKA) of the medial or lateral compartment of the knee, were excluded. Additionally, only articles that assessed functional and/or clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes (PROMs), radiographic progression of OA, complication rates, implant survival rates, pain, as well as conversion to TKA rates in patients treated with PFA, using inlay or onlay trochlea designs, were included. For quality assessment, the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) for non-comparative and comparative clinical intervention studies was used. RESULTS: The literature search identified 404 articles. 29 of them met all the inclusion criteria following the selection process. Median MINORS for non-comparative studies value was 12.5 (range 11-14), and for comparative studies 20.1 (range 17-24). In terms of clinical and functional outcomes, no difference between onlay and inlay PFA has been described. Both designs yielded satisfactory results at short, medium and long-term follow-ups. Both designs improved pain postoperatively and no difference between them in terms of postoperative VAS has been noted, although the onlay groups presented a higher preoperative VAS. When comparing the inlay to onlay trochlea designs, the inlay group displayed a lower progression of OA rate. CONCLUSION: There is no difference in functional or clinical outcomes after PFA between the new inlay and the onlay designs, with both presenting an improvement in most of the scores that were used. A higher rate of OA progression was observed in the onlay design group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
