Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Variability of the femoral mechanical-anatomical axis angle and its implications in primary and revision total knee arthroplasty.
Jang, Seong J; Kunze, Kyle N; Casey, Jack C; Steele, Jack R; Mayman, David J; Jerabek, Seth A; Sculco, Peter K; Vigdorchik, Jonathan M.
Afiliação
  • Jang SJ; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.
  • Kunze KN; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.
  • Casey JC; Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.
  • Steele JR; Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.
  • Mayman DJ; Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, USA.
  • Jerabek SA; Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.
  • Sculco PK; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.
  • Vigdorchik JM; Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.
Bone Jt Open ; 5(2): 101-108, 2024 Feb 06.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38316146
ABSTRACT

Aims:

Distal femoral resection in conventional total knee arthroplasty (TKA) utilizes an intramedullary guide to determine coronal alignment, commonly planned for 5° of valgus. However, a standard 5° resection angle may contribute to malalignment in patients with variability in the femoral anatomical and mechanical axis angle. The purpose of the study was to leverage deep learning (DL) to measure the femoral mechanical-anatomical axis angle (FMAA) in a heterogeneous cohort.

Methods:

Patients with full-limb radiographs from the Osteoarthritis Initiative were included. A DL workflow was created to measure the FMAA and validated against human measurements. To reflect potential intramedullary guide placement during manual TKA, two different FMAAs were calculated either using a line approximating the entire diaphyseal shaft, and a line connecting the apex of the femoral intercondylar sulcus to the centre of the diaphysis. The proportion of FMAAs outside a range of 5.0° (SD 2.0°) was calculated for both definitions, and FMAA was compared using univariate analyses across sex, BMI, knee alignment, and femur length.

Results:

The algorithm measured 1,078 radiographs at a rate of 12.6 s/image (2,156 unique measurements in 3.8 hours). There was no significant difference or bias between reader and algorithm measurements for the FMAA (p = 0.130 to 0.563). The FMAA was 6.3° (SD 1.0°; 25% outside range of 5.0° (SD 2.0°)) using definition one and 4.6° (SD 1.3°; 13% outside range of 5.0° (SD 2.0°)) using definition two. Differences between males and females were observed using definition two (males more valgus; p < 0.001).

Conclusion:

We developed a rapid and accurate DL tool to quantify the FMAA. Considerable variation with different measurement approaches for the FMAA supports that patient-specific anatomy and surgeon-dependent technique must be accounted for when correcting for the FMAA using an intramedullary guide. The angle between the mechanical and anatomical axes of the femur fell outside the range of 5.0° (SD 2.0°) for nearly a quarter of patients.

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Bone Jt Open Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos País de publicação: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Bone Jt Open Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos País de publicação: Reino Unido