Large multiplanar changes to native alignment have no apparent impact on clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: This study sought to examine if achieved postoperative alignment when compared to the native anatomy would lead to a difference in Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), and whether the achieved alignment could be broadly categorised by an accepted alignment strategy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data on patients undergoing single primary or bilateral simultaneous total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was carried out. CT scans were used to determine the mean change ("delta values") between the pre and postoperative; hip-knee-ankle angle, lateral distal femoral angle, medial proximal tibial angle and femoral implant rotation. Femoral implant flexion and tibial implant slope were measured postoperatively. The primary outcome was the relationship of the variables to the change in KOOS pain subscale after one year. The secondary outcome was the number of knees which could be categorised postoperatively to an alignment strategy, and the mean PROMs in each cohort. RESULTS: A total of 296 knees in 261 patients were available for analysis. With regards to the primary outcome, the delta values for each variable did not demonstrate any association with the change in knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) pain score. Approximately 46% of knees could not be categorised to an alignment strategy based on postoperatively measured alignment, with no significant difference between each cohort with regards to the change in KOOS Pain score. CONCLUSION: Achieved alignment does not consistently match accepted alignment strategies, and appears to confer no benefit to clinical outcomes when the native anatomy is most closely approximated, nor results in poorer outcomes in outliers. This study highlights the importance of routine three dimensional pre and postoperative imaging in clinical practice and for the valid analysis of outcomes in studies on alignment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Restricted kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty with an anatomically designed implant can restore constitutional coronal lower limb alignment.

PURPOSE: Restricted kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty (rKA-TKA) may not restore the constitutional varus alignment in most patients with knee osteoarthritis. This study aimed to investigate (1) the extent to which constitutional lower limb alignment can be restored by rKA-TKA using an anatomically designed implant and (2) which lower limb alignment parameters are associated with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). METHODS: This study included 60 patients who underwent rKA-TKA using an anatomically designed implant. Radiographic alignment parameters, including mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA), medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), coronal hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), coronal joint line obliquity (JLO), posterior tibial slope (PTS), single-leg standing knee flexion angle (KFA), sagittal JLO, and arithmetic HKA (aHKA), were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) was used for clinical evaluation. RESULTS: The mLDFA, MPTA, and aHKA showed no significant differences before and after surgery. Coronal HKA and PTS have significantly changed from 8.1 ± 8.7° and 9.9 ± 8.6° preoperatively to 3.5 ± 3.1° and 2.5 ± 2.0° postoperatively, respectively (p < 0.001 for each comparison). The postoperative WOMAC total score was significantly correlated with the KFA (r = 0.4063, p = 0.0034) and sagittal JLO (r = -0.3435, p = 0.0157). Postoperative KFA is a causal factor for the increased postoperative WOMAC total score (r = 1.416, 95% confidence interval: 0.491-2.342, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: rKA-TKA using an anatomically designed implant can restore constitutional coronal lower limb alignment, while postoperative KFA and sagittal JLO were associated with poor PROMs. Care should be taken for the postoperative KFA because it is a risk factor for poor PROMs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, case-control study.

Superiority of kinematic alignment over mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty during medium- to long-term follow-up: A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare and determine the reliability and conclusiveness of the medium- and long-term efficacy in terms of patient-reported outcome measures and the risk of revisions or reoperations (RRRs) of kinematic alignment (KA) and mechanical alignment (MA) in total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted in Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Database Library to identify relevant literature. Only randomised clinical trials (RCTs) published before July 2023 were included. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) and RRR were compared. Additionally, OKS and RRR were subjected to a trial sequential analysis. RESULTS: Seven RCTs involving 572 knees were identified. The pooled analysis of the included studies demonstrated that KA showed better medium-term WOMAC and OKS (mean difference [MD] = -6.3, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -9.52 to -2.99, p < 0.05 and MD = 1.1, 95% CI: 0.05-2.15, p < 0.05), respectively), but no significant differences were observed in the long-term follow-up (MD = 2.1, 95% CI: -3.21 to 7.31, not significant [n.s.] and MD = 0.01, 95% CI: -2.43 to 2.46, n.s., respectively). FJS (standardised MD = -0.03, 95% CI: -0.25 to 0.19, n.s.) and RRR (risk ratio = 1.0, 95% CI: 0.57 to 1.74, n.s.) showed no significant intergroup differences (n.s.). The evidence quality ranged from moderate to high, and the trial sequential analysis indicated the need for additional high-quality RCTs to draw more conclusive results. CONCLUSIONS: KA showed better medium-term WOMAC and OKS, while KA and MA had similar FJS without increasing the RRR in medium- and long-term follow-up. Further research is needed for more conclusive results. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II (meta-analyses).

Personalized alignment techniques better restore the native trochlear groove compared to systematic alignment techniques in total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: The relationship between constitutional coronal alignment and implant positioning on trochlear groove restoration in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is poorly understood. This study aimed to determine whether the choice of alignment philosophy significantly affects the restoration of the trochlea groove. METHODS: Sixty-one imageless robotic TKAs performed by a single orthopaedic surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. In each case, the entire native trochlea was digitized to generate the native femoral anatomy, and implants were planned according to a functional alignment (FA) technique. Final implant position was recorded using the validated bone resection planes from the navigation system. Simulated femoral component positions were generated according to previously described alignment techniques: mechanical alignment (MA), gap balancing (GB), kinematic alignment (KA), restricted kinematic alignment (rKA) and restricted inverse kinematic alignment (riKA). Trochlear angle (TA), trochlear under/overstuffing and mediolateral sulcus offset were compared between the six simulated alignment techniques, as well as the final implanted technique. Further analyses investigated the effect of preoperative coronal alignment on trochlear position. Comparisons were assessed with an analysis of variance and Welch's t-tests or Wilcoxon's rank-sum tests with Bonferroni corrections. RESULTS: The implanted and simulated techniques all resulted in greater TA valgus compared to the native groove (p < 0.001). The implanted technique, KA and rKA were closer to the native TA than GB, MA and riKA (p > 0.001). All alignment philosophies understuffed the native trochlea groove. KA and rKA understuffed less than all other techniques (p < 0.001), and GB understuffed more than all other techniques (p < 0.001). In extension, all techniques shifted the trochlear sulcus laterally, while in flexion, they medialized it. These effects were most prominent in GB and MA. CONCLUSION: Personalized alignment techniques such as KA and rKA, which consider variations in individual anatomy, best restore the native patellar groove compared to systematic alignment techniques when using a standardized femoral component. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective review.

Caliper-verified unrestricted kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty in Asian patients showed efficacious mid- to long-term results regardless of postoperative alignment categories.

PURPOSE: There have been insufficient data regarding the long-term results of unrestricted kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty (unKATKA) in Asian patients. We investigated mid- to long-term clinical and radiological follow-up data of Korean patients after caliper-verified unKATKA of minimum 7.4-10 years including categorised data of postoperative tibial component, limb and knee alignment. Additionally, we analysed the preoperative distribution and postoperative restoration of coronal plane alignment of knee (CPAK) phenotypes. METHODS: This study is a retrospective analysis of 63 patients: 96 osteoarthritic underwent consecutive caliper-verified unKATKA between October 2013 and May 2016 by a single surgeon. Implant survivorship was investigated for revision for any reason. Each knee was categorised into an in-range or outlier group by three postoperative alignment parameters: tibial component, knee and limb alignment. Statistical analyses were done for any significant differences in clinical scores and implant survival rates between groups. Finally, all knees were classified into CPAK classification postoperatively and postoperatively. The CPAK restoration rate was calculated. RESULTS: Among 85 knees in the clinically confirmed group, implant survival was 98.8%. There was one case of revision due to periprosthetic fracture. The percentage postoperatively aligned in the varus (valgus) outlier range was 100% (0%) for tibial component, 16.7% (24.8%) for the knee alignment and 51% (0%) for the limb alignment. All three categories did not affect implant survival or clinical scores. Eighty one out of 96 knees (84.4%) were restored to their CPAK phenotype postoperatively. CONCLUSION: With the limitation of a case series having a small number of patients and gender deviation, our study suggests that caliper-verified unKATKA could be a good option regardless of geographical variation of constitutional alignment in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Kinematical alignment better restores native patellar tracking pattern than mechanical alignment.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess whether kinematic alignment (KA) outperforms mechanical alignment (MA) in restoring patellar tracking to native patterns by using a clustering algorithm. METHODS: Twenty cadavers (40 knees) were evaluated. For each cadaver, one knee was randomly assigned to KA and the other to MA. KA total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures were performed using a caliper-verified technique, while MA TKA procedures utilized a measured resection technique. Subsequently, all specimens were mounted on a customized knee-testing system, and patellar tracking was measured using a motion analysis system. All patellar tracking data were clustered using the density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise algorithm. Differences in patellar tracking patterns and the restoration of native patellar tracking were compared between the two alignment strategies. RESULTS: Patellar tracking patterns following KA were considerably different from MA. Pre- and post-TKA patellar tracking patterns following MA were grouped into separate clusters, whereas a substantial proportion of patellar tracking patterns following KA were grouped into the pre-TKA dominant cluster. Compared to MA, a greater proportion of patellar tracking patterns following KA showed similar patterns to native knees (p < 0.05) and more patellar tracking patterns following KA paired with preoperative patterns (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: KA restored native patellar tracking patterns more closely compared to MA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Calipered kinematic alignment restored the arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle, achieved high satisfaction and improved clinical outcomes.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether unrestricted calipered kinematic alignment (KA), coupled with a medial-stabilised (MS) implant system, can reproduce the patient's constitutional alignment as per the arithmetic hip-knee-ankle (aHKA) and improve clinical outcomes. METHODS: One-hundred and ninety-three patients received total knee arthroplasty by the senior author. To determine whether the constitutional alignment was achieved, the postoperative hip-knee-ankle (HKA) alignment was compared against the aHKA. Range of motion (ROM) was determined preoperative and postoperatively at 6 months and 2 years by measuring the active flexion and extension. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures (PROMs) including Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) and Visual Analogue Scale for Satisfaction were also completed. The Sports and Recreation component of KOOS was used to assess the patient's ability to return to sports and daily activities. RESULTS: There was a strong correlation between postoperative HKA and aHKA (r = 0.7, p < 0.05). There was a significant improvement in both extension and flexion seen from as early as 6 months postoperatively, with a mean flexion of 123° ± 11° and extension of 1° ± 3° at 2 years. PROMs had significant improvements with a mean score of 42.8 ± 6.0 for the OKS and all KOOS subscales consisting of Symptoms (88.0 ± 11.7), Pain (91.4 ± 11.6), Activities of Daily Living (91.1 ± 12.4), Sports (76.8 ± 22.1) and Quality of Life (83.0 ± 19.1). The FJS had significant improvements from 6 months to 2 years of 19.9 (p < 0.05), with a mean score of 69.2 ± 26.6 at 2 years. Ninety-three percent (180 patients) were classified as 'satisfied' at the 2-year timepoint. The KOOS Sports component was completed by 64% (124 patients), whereby the mean age was younger than the noncompliant patients (67.7 ± 9.4 vs. 71.7 ± 8.2 years). CONCLUSION: Unrestricted calipered KA can result in an alignment that closely resembles the patient's constitutional alignment, as per the aHKA. This resulted in improved knee ROM and patient satisfaction, as well as assisting younger patients to return to sports and daily activities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

CPAK classification cannot be used to determine segmental coronal extra-articular knee deformity.

PURPOSE: While the coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) classification serves as a useful guide in personalising total knee arthroplasty (TKA), the extent of its correlation with segmental coronal extra-articular knee deformities remains uncertain. This study aims to investigate the potential correlation between CPAK matrix groups and segmental coronal extra-articular deformities in prearthritic knees, shedding light on the relationship between these two factors that seems to be both essential to perform personalised TKA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A radiological assessment of 1240 nonarthritic knees was performed by evaluating lower limb measurements following the protocol established by Paley et al. Subsequently, all knees were classified into their respective CPAK matrix groups. In our quest to discern any correlation between the CPAK matrix groups and the presence of segmental coronal extra-articular knee deformities, nine potential coronal extra-articular deformity phenotype (CEDP) groupswere identified based on medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) and mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA). Neutral values for MPTA and mLDFA were set at 90.0° ± 3.0° and then at 87.0° ± 2.0°. Each CPAK matrix group underwent detailed coronal morphology analysis and then, segmental coronal extra-articular deformities were assessed by comparing them with the CEDP groups. RESULTS: The study revealed a mean hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) of 178.6° ± 4.4°, mLDFA of 86.9° ± 2.5°, MPTA of 85.4° ± 2.4°, arithmetic HKA of -1.4° ± 3.2° and joint line obliquity of 172.5° ± 3.7°. The varus CPAK groups (I/IV/VII) included 435 patients, the neutral groups (II/V/VIII) comprised 630 patients and the valgus groups (III/VI/IX) had 175 patients. Notably, CPAK matrix groups were not distinctly associated with specific coronal extra-articular deformity phenotype (CEDP) groups. Particularly among the most common CPAK matrix groups (I/II/III/IV/V), there was a significant variation in segmental coronal extra-articular deformity patterns. Moreover, when neutral MPTA/mLDFA values were set at 87.0° ± 2.0°, the CPAK matrix groups exhibited even greater variability in coronal extra-articular deformities. CONCLUSION: The CPAK matrix groups do not exhibit a direct correlation with a specific extra-articular deformity pattern (CEDP), thus rendering them unsuitable for determining segmental coronal extra-articular knee deformities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective diagnostic study.

Higher satisfaction and function scores in restricted kinematic alignment versus mechanical alignment with medial pivot design total knee arthroplasty: A prospective randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Restricted kinematic alignment (rKA) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and medial pivot (MP) knee designs already showed superior outcomes in independent comparative studies. The objective of this study was to assess whether rKA with MP TKA provides better clinical and functional outcomes compared to mechanical alignment (MA) with MP TKA. METHODS: This is a randomised, parallel two group study involving a total of 98 patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis. Patients were randomly allocated to either rKA or MA TKA procedures conducted with a MP prothesis using patient-specific instruments between 2017 and 2020. Final follow-up was at 2 years postoperatively. Demographic data and clinical and functional scores (Oxford knee score, knee society score [KSS], Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC], forgotten joint score [FJS]) were collected and compared preoperative, 1 year postoperative and 2 years postoperative. Coronal plane alignment of the knee and functional knee phenotype classification were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients (rKA) and 51 patients (MA) were included in final analysis. Superior joint awareness scores (FJS) were found at 1 year postoperative for rKA (62.2 vs. 52.4, p = 0.04). KSS subscores (expectation score, satisfaction score) improved with rKA with significant differences at both 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Major differences between rKA and MA were found in subgroup analysis of varus and neutral CPAK phenotypes. Both 1 year and 2 years postoperatively, FJS was significantly better in KA compared with MA in varus CPAK phenotypes (63.1 vs. 44.9, p = 0.03; 71.1 vs. 46.0, p = 0.005). Further clinical and functional scores showed improvement in the varus CPAK phenotypes with predominantly significant improvement in the expectation and satisfaction KSS subscores. No significant differences were found in the comparison of rKA and MA in neutral CPAK phenotypes. CONCLUSION: The rKA of MP TKA design shows superior patient satisfaction and self-reported function when compared to MA MP TKA. Furthermore, rKA MP TKA shows superior joint awareness at early postoperative stage. The most important clinical relevance of this study is the clear superiority of rKA in varus phenotypes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

A Restricted Functional Balancing Technique for Total Knee Arthroplasty With a Varus Deformity: Does a Medial Soft-Tissue Release Result in a Worse Outcome?

BACKGROUND: A functional alignment technique for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) utilizes implant position modifications to balance the soft tissues. There is concern that, in some cases, extreme coronal and tibial component alignment could facilitate early implant failure. To be cautious, a restricted functional alignment may be used. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the results of TKA in patients who have varus deformities using a restricted functional alignment technique. We hypothesized that adding a medial soft-tissue release within restricted boundaries would not result in inferior outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on robotic arm-assisted TKA patients with varus deformities utilizing a functional balancing strategy with a three-degree varus coronal limb and tibial component alignment restriction. Outcome scores of those patients still requiring a medial-soft tissue release were compared to those without for inferior outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 202 of 259 (78.0%) knees were able to be balanced without any medial soft-tissue release with an average final hip-knee-ankle alignment of 1.9° varus. The remaining 57 knees required a medial soft-tissue release. They had an average final hip-knee-ankle of 2.8° varus and an average medial proximal tibial angle of 2.5° varus. Comparing the cohorts without and with a release, at final follow-up averaging two years, there was not a statistically significant difference in Knee Society-Knee Score (97.7 and 98.4, P = .525), Functional Score (86.7 and 88.7, P = .514), Forgotten Joint Score (59.8 and 66.6, P = .136), and Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey for Joint Replacement Junior Score (79.5 and 84.8, P = .066). CONCLUSIONS: Utilizing a restrictive functional balancing strategy for TKA minimizes the need for soft-tissue releases and provides for excellent overall outcomes. An additional medial soft-tissue release can still be utilized without an inferior average two-year outcome.

Reoperation, Implant Survival, and Clinical Outcome After Kinematically Aligned Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Concise Clinical Follow-Up at 16 Years.

BACKGROUND: The preceding study reported a 10-year follow-up of 222 kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasties (TKA) performed in 217 patients in 2007. As 35% of tibial components and 8% of limbs were in >3° varus, the present study assessed whether this adversely affected reoperation, implant survival, and function at 16 years. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a single surgeon's private practice database to determine the patients who underwent reoperation as well as Forgotten Joint Score and Oxford Knee Score. RESULTS: There were 7 patients who had a major reoperation (revision of a loose tibial component [n = 2], and revision of well-fixed component due to stiffness [n = 1], patella instability [n = 1], pain [n = 1], and infection [n = 2]). There were 5 who had a minor reoperation that retained the components, and 91 patients (94 TKAs) died. Implant survivorship was 93% using reoperation for any reason as the endpoint. The median (interquartile range) Forgotten Joint and Oxford Knee scores were 88 (57 to 100) and 45 (39 to 48) points, respectively. CONCLUSION: The kinematically aligned TKA had a 7% reoperation rate at 16 years follow-up, comparable to or lower than reports of mechanically aligned TKA, which supports the concept of the unrestricted version of kinematic alignment in which the patient's prearthritic alignment is fully restored regardless of deformity.

Alignment in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Avoid Crossing Over From Varus to Valgus.

BACKGROUND: Ideal target limb alignment remains a debated topic in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We aimed to determine the effect of limb alignment correction on patient-reported outcomes and knee range of motion (ROM) following TKA. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, patients (N = 409) undergoing primary TKA at a single institution were studied. Using full leg-length radiographs, limb alignment was measured preoperatively and postoperatively. Patients were categorized by preoperative (Preop) alignment (varus > 0°; valgus < 0°). Preop varus patients were then divided as follows based on postoperative alignment: neutral (VAR-NEUT, 0°± 2), remaining in varus (VAR-rVAR, ≥3°), and cross-over to valgus (VAR-CO, ≤-3°). Similarly, Preop valgus patients were divided as follows for postoperative alignment: neutral (VAL-NEUT, 0°± 2), remaining in valgus (VAL-rVAL, ≤-3°), and cross-over to varus (VAL-CO, ≥3°). The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement survey scores were collected at preoperatively as well as at 6 weeks, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Knee ROM was collected at 2 weeks, 6 to 12 weeks, and >6 months postoperatively. An analysis of variance repeated on time followed by a Bonferroni post hoc test was used to compare outcomes for the postoperative alignment subgroups. RESULTS: Preop Varus patients: Those in the VAR-CO group (overcorrected to -4.03° ± 1.95valgus) were observed to have lower Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement scores at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively compared to those in the NEUT group (P < .05). This finding was paired with reduced ROM at 6 to 12 weeks postoperatively in the VAR-CO group compared to VAR-NEUT and VAR-rVAR (P < .05). Preop Valgus patients: Those in the VAL-rVal group (left in -4.39° ± 1.39valgus) were observed to have reduced knee flexion at 6 to 12 weeks postoperatively compared to VAL-NEUT and VAL-CO. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that postoperative valgus alignment via either crossing over to valgus (VAR-CO) or remaining in valgus (VAL-rVAL) alignment may result in less preferable outcomes than correction to neutral or slightly varus alignment.

No Difference in Limb Alignment Between Kinematic and Mechanical Alignment Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Individualized alignment techniques have gained major interest in an effort to increase satisfaction among total knee arthroplasty patients. This study aimed to compare postoperative alignment between kinematic alignment (KA) and mechanical alignment (MA) and assess whether KA significantly deviates from the principle of aligning the limb as close to neutral alignment as possible. METHODS: There were 234 patients who underwent robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty using an unrestricted KA and a strict MA technique (KA: 145, MA: 89). The lateral distal femoral angle, medial proximal tibia angle, and the resultant arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA) were measured. The aHKA < 0 indicated varus alignment, while the aHKA > 0 indicated valgus knee alignment. The primary outcome was the frequency of cases that resulted in an aHKA of ± 4° of neutral (0°), as assessed on full-leg standing radiographs obtained at 6 weeks postoperatively. The secondary outcome was the change in coronal plane alignment of the knee classification type from preoperative to postoperative between the MA and KA groups. RESULTS: The mean preoperative aHKA was similar between the 2 groups (P = .19). The KA group had a mean postoperative aHKA of -1.4 ± 2.4°, while the MA group had a mean postoperative aHKA of -0.5 ± 2.1°. No significant difference in limb alignment was identified between KA and MA cases that resulted in hip-knee-ankle angle of ± 4° being neutral (91.7 versus 96.6%, P = .14). There were 97.2% of cases in the KA group that fell within the ± 5° range. The MA group was associated with a significantly higher rate of coronal plane alignment of the knee classification type change from preoperatively to postoperatively (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Kinematic alignment achieved similar postoperative aHKA compared to MA, and thus did not significantly deviate from the principle of aligning the limb as close to neutral alignment as possible. Surgeons should feel comfortable starting to introduce individualized alignment techniques. Without being restricted by boundaries, postoperative alignment will be within 5 degrees of neutral 97% of the time.

Kinematic Alignment Technique Outperforms Mechanical Alignment in Simultaneous Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical results of kinematic alignment (KA) with those of mechanical alignment (MA) in single-stage bilateral total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: In this double-blinded randomized controlled trial, 65 patients who had bilateral knee osteoarthritis underwent simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty. One knee was randomly selected to be operated on with the calipered-KA technique and the other with MA. The participants were assessed via the Oxford Knee Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index questionnaire, and visual analog scale before the surgery and the same plus the Forgotten Joint Score at their last follow-up visit, 2 years postoperatively. Maximum knee flexion and the time reaching maximum knee flexion, named the recovery time, were also recorded. Hip-knee-ankle angle, medial proximal tibial angle, and lateral distal femoral angle were measured before and after the surgery using 3-joint-view radiographs. RESULTS: At 2 years, there were significant differences between the KA and MA techniques in terms of duration of surgery, recovery time, and final Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Forgotten Joint Score, and maximum flexion range in favor of KA (P < .05), but no significant difference in visual analog scale score or Oxford Knee Score. In patients who have a preferred knee, the KA knee was preferred over the MA knee by most patients. No prosthetic failure or revision was reported in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The KA technique yields acceptable functional outcomes compared to the MA technique. The KA technique was associated with a shorter surgery time, a faster recovery time, and higher patient satisfaction in 2-year follow-ups. Larger multicenter studies with longer follow-ups are warranted to confirm these findings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Postoperative clinical outcomes for kinematically, restricted kinematically, or mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (MATKA) is a well-established procedure. Kinematically aligned TKA (KATKA) has been proposed to restore and preserve pre-arthritic knee anatomy. However, normal knee anatomy varies widely, and there have been concerns regarding restoring unusual anatomy. Accordingly, restricted KATKA (rKATKA) was introduced to reproduce constitutional knee anatomy within a safe range. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of the surgeries. METHODS: We performed a database search on August 20, 2022, which included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any two of the three surgical TKA techniques for knee osteoarthritis. We conducted a random-effects NMA within the frequentist framework and evaluated confidence in each outcome using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis tool. RESULTS: Ten RCTs with 1,008 knees and a median follow-up period of 1.5 years were included. The three methods might result in little to no difference in range of motion (ROM) between methods. In patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), the KATKA might result in a slight improvement compared with the MATKA (standardized mean difference, 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16-0.78; very low confidence). There was little to no difference in revision risk between MATKA and KATKA. KATKA and rKATKA showed a slight valgus femoral component (mean difference [MD], -1.35; 95% CI, -1.95-[-0.75]; very low confidence; and MD, -1.72; 95% CI, -2.63-[-0.81]; very low confidence, respectively) and a slight varus tibial component (MD, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.22-3.24; very low confidence; and MD, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.01-2.49; very low confidence, respectively) compared with MATKA. Tibial component inclination and hip-knee-ankle angle might result in little to no difference between the three procedures. CONCLUSIONS: KATKA and rKATKA showed similar ROM and PROMs and a slight variation in the coronal component alignment compared with MATKA. KATKA and rKATKA are acceptable methods in short- to mid-term follow-up periods. However, long-term clinical results in patients with severe varus deformity are still lacking. Surgeons should choose surgical procedures carefully. Further trials are warranted to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and subsequent revision risk.

Inverse kinematic alignment accommodates native coronal knee alignment better in comparison to adjusted mechanical alignment and restricted kinematic alignment.

PURPOSE: The purpose was to determine the proportion of native non-arthritic knees that fit within the target zones of adjusted mechanical alignment (aMA), restricted kinematic alignment (rKA), and inverse kinematic alignment (iKA), and to estimate adjustments in native coronal alignment to bring outlier knees within the respective target zones. The hypothesis was that the target zone of iKA, compared to the target zones of aMA and rKA, accommodates a higher proportion of native non-arthritic knees. METHODS: The study used measurements obtained from a computed tomography (CT) scan database (SOMA, Stryker) of 972 healthy knees (Caucasian, 586; Asian, 386). Hip knee ankle (HKA) angle, medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) and lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA) were used to estimate the proportions of knees within the patient-specific alignment target zones; and to estimate theoretical adjustments of MPTA, LDFA and soft tissue balance (HKA) to bring outlier knees within target zones. Theoretical adjustments to bring outlier knees within the alignment target zones of aMA, rKA and iKA were calculated by subtracting the native coronal alignment angles (MPTAnative, LDFAnative and HKAnative) from angles on the nearest target zone border (MPTAtarget, LDFAtarget and HKAtarget). RESULTS: Patients were aged 59.8 ± 15.8 years with a BMI of 25.0 ± 4.4 kg/m2. The HKA angles were between 168° and 186°, MPTA between 78° and 98° and LDFA between 79° and 93°. Of the 972 knees, 81 (8%) were in the aMA target zone, 530 (55%) were in the rKA target zone, and 721 (74%) were in the iKA target zone. Adjustments of MPTA, LDFA and HKA angle to bring outlier knees within the target zones, were, respectively, 90, 91 and 28% for aMA, 45, 28 and 25% for rKA, and 25, 23 and 7% for iKA. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variability in native knee coronal alignment that corresponds to different proportions of the restricted patient-specific alignment target zones for TKA. Although extension of the MPTA and LDFA target zones with rKA accommodate native knee alignment better than aMA, up to 25% would require adjustment of native HKA angle. By also extending the HKA angle target zone into varus, iKA accommodates a greater proportion (93%) of native limb alignment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

A robotic-assisted simulation of kinematic alignment in TKA leads to excessive valgus and internal rotation in valgus knees.

PURPOSE: Strategies to further improve patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty include the introduction of new alignment philosophies and more precise instruments such as navigation and robotics. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a combination of image-based robotic assistance and the use of modern alignment strategies on the resulting joint line obliquity as well as femoral component rotation and to compare this between varus, neutral and valgus knees. METHODS: This retrospective study included 200 patients who received a robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (MAKO®, Stryker) using functional alignment between 2018 and 2020. The patients were divided into a varus (103 patients), neutral (57 patients) and valgus (40 patients) group. The intraoperatively recorded bone cuts and resulting joint line obliquity were identified and compared to values obtained with a robotic computer simulation of kinematic alignment. RESULTS: The mean femoral coronal alignment of the varus, neutral and valgus group, respectively, equalled 0.5° (± 1.1°), 1.1° (± 0.8°) and 1.6° (± 0.7°) of valgus with functional alignment and 2.1° (± 2.1°), 4.1° (± 1.7°) and 6.2° (± 1.7°) of valgus with kinematic alignment. The mean femoral axial alignment of the valgus group resulted in 0.8° (± 2.0°) of internal rotation with functional alignment and 3.9° (± 2.8°) of internal rotation with kinematic alignment. Overall, 186 knees (93%) could be balanced while respecting certain safe zones by using functional alignment as opposed to 54 knees (27% and none in the valgus group) when applying kinematic alignment. Kinematic alignment led to a combination of femoral component valgus and internal rotation of more than 3° in 22 valgus knees (55%), 10 neutral knees (18%) and 3 varus knees (3%) compared to none in each group when applying functional alignment with safe zones. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted kinematic alignment leads to a combination of excessive valgus and internal rotation of the femoral component in valgus and to a lesser extent also in neutral knees when compared with functional alignment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Long leg radiographs underestimate the degree of constitutional varus limb alignment and joint line obliquity in comparison with computed tomography: a radiographic study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to understand if differences exist between computed tomography (CT) and long leg radiographs (LLR) when defining coronal plane alignment of the lower limb in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). It aimed to identify any such differences between the two imaging modalities by quantifying constitutional limb alignment (arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA), joint line obliquity (JLO) and Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) type within the same population. METHODS: A retrospective radiographic study compared pre-operative LLR and CT measurements in patients undergoing robotic-assisted TKA. The aHKA, JLO and CPAK types were calculated after measuring the medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) and lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA). The primary outcomes were the mean differences in aHKA (MPTA-LDFA), JLO (MPTA + LDFA) and proportions of CPAK types between LLR and CT groups. The secondary outcomes were the differences in CT-derived MPTA values based on four different tibial sagittal landmarks. RESULTS: After exclusions, 465 imaging sets were analysed in 394 patients. There was a statistically significant mean difference between LLR and CT, respectively, for both MPTA (87.5° vs. 86.2°; p < 0.01) and LDFA (88.7° vs. 87.3°; p < 0.01). There were also statistically significant differences for aHKA (- 0.2° vs. - 1.1°) and JLO (175.1° vs. 173.4°) for LLR and CT, respectively (both p < 0.01). CT increased the proportion of patients with CPAK Type I (constitutional varus aHKA, apex distal JLO) and CPAK Type II (neutral aHKA, apex distal JLO), and decreased numbers of CPAK Types III-VI. There were significant mean differences in the MPTA using varying sagittal landmarks. CONCLUSION: Alignment determined by LLRs underestimates the magnitude of both constitutional varus alignment and joint line obliquity compared to CT, differences that notably increase the proportions of patients included in CPAK Types I and II. These distinctions are primarily due to underestimation of proximal tibial varus when measured on LLRs compared to CT, which more specifically defines articular weight-bearing points. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

A comparison of robotic-assisted and manual techniques in restricted kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty: coronal alignment improvement with no significant clinical differences.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare radiographic and clinical outcomes of robotic-assisted and conventional manual techniques in restricted kinematically aligned TKA. METHODS: Patients who underwent either manual or robotic-assisted restricted kinematically aligned TKA between 2019 and 2020 were included in this retrospective comparative study. Radiographic outcomes comprised coronal plane measurements performed through standing full-length anteroposterior radiographs. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Oxford score, Visual Analog Scale pain and satisfaction score, and Forgotten Joint Score were used to determine the clinical outcome. The continuous data were compared by Student's t test according to the Kolmogorov‒Smirnov normality test. RESULTS: The manual group consisted of 46 patients (38 females, eight males) with a mean age of 68.1 years, and the robotic group consisted of 70 patients (58 females, 12 males) with a mean age of 65.7 years (n.s.). Preoperatively, no significant difference was observed between groups concerning demographic characteristics, radiographic measurements, and clinical scores except for the symptom and pain domains of the KOOS score, which was significantly worse in the manual group (p = 0.011 and 0.035, respectively). At the postoperative 2-year follow-up, we observed significant differences between groups with respect to the mean HKA angle, mMPTA, and mLDFA (p = 0.034, 0.041, and 0.005, respectively). A comparison of clinical scores at the postoperative 2-year follow-up demonstrated no significant differences between groups. CONCLUSION: The current study demonstrated that using robotic-assisted technique for restricted kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) resulted in significantly better outcomes compared to the conventional manual technique in achieving normal ranges of lower extremity coronal alignment measurements. While the robotic-assisted group demonstrated better clinical scores, there was no statistically significant difference in clinical outcomes between the robotic-assisted group and the control group at the two-year follow-up. Concerning clinical relevance, the restoration of original anatomy and coronal alignment, a crucial concern in restricted kinematically aligned TKA, may be better achieved by the robotic-assisted technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III (Retrospective cohort study).

Navigated functional alignment total knee arthroplasty achieves reliable, reproducible and accurate results with high patient satisfaction.

PURPOSE: The decision on which technique to perform a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has become more complicated over the last decade. Perceived limitations of mechanical alignment (MA) and kinematic alignment (KA) have led to the development of the functional alignment (FA) philosophy. This study aims to report the 2-year results of an initial patient cohort in terms of revision rate, PROMs and complications for Computer Aided Surgery (CAS) Navigated FA TKA. METHODS: This paper reports a single surgeon's outcomes of 165 consecutive CAS FA TKAs. The final follow-up was 24 months. Pre-operative and post-operative patient-reported outcome measures, WOMAC and KSS, and intra-operative CAS data, including alignment, kinematic curves, and gaps, are reported. Stress kinematic curves were analysed for correlation with CAS final alignment and CAS final alignment with radiographic long-leg alignment. Pre- and post-operative CPAK and knee phenotypes were recorded. Three different types of prostheses from two manufacturers were used, and outcomes were compared. Soft tissue releases, revision and complication data are also reported. RESULTS: Mean pre-operative WOMAC was 48.8 and 1.2 at the time of the final follow-up. KSS was 48.8 and 93.7, respectively. Pre- and post-operative range of motion was 118.6° and 120.1°, respectively. Pre-operative and final kinematic curve prediction had an accuracy of 91.8%. CAS data pre-operative stress alignment and final alignment strongly correlate in extension and flexion, r = 0.926 and 0.856, p < 0.001. No statistical outcome difference was detected between the types of prostheses. 14.5% of patients required soft tissue release, with the lateral release (50%) and posterior capsule (29%) being the most common. CONCLUSION: CAS FA TKA in this cohort proved to be a predictable, reliable, and reproducible technique with acceptable short-term revision rates and high PROMs. FA can account for extremes in individual patient bony morphology and achieve desired gap and kinematic targets with soft tissue releases required in only 14.5% of patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (retrospective case series review).