Abstract
The “correct” rotational alignment and “normal” rotational alignment may not be the same position. Because of natural tibial plateau has average 3° varus but classical TKA method make tibial cut perpendicularly to tibial mechanical axis. Consequently femoral rotational compensation to 3° becomes necessary. While anatomical TKA method performed tibial cut in 3° varus. Then posterior femoral cut will be parallel to posterior condylar axis and component rotation theoretically should be aligned in natural anatomy. This study compares the rotational alignment between two methods.
Study conducted on 80 navigated TKAs with modified gap technique. Intraoperative femoral rotation retrieved from navigation. Rotational alignment was calculated using the Berger protocol with postoperative computerised tomography scanning. The alignment parameters measured were tibial and femoral component rotations and the combined component rotations.
57 knees with PS design can be classified into 35 knees as anatomical group and 22 knees as classical group. 23 knees with CR design had 12 knees as anatomical group and 11 knees as classical group. The intraoperative femoral rotation in anatomical group had less external rotation than classical group significantly in PS design (0.77°±1.03° vs 2.86°±1.49°, p = 0.00) and also had the same results in CR design (1.33°±1.37°vs 2.64°±0.81°, p = 0.012). However, the postoperative excessive femoral and tibial component rotation compared with native value and combined rotation had no significant differences between classical and anatomical method in both implant design.
Using CAS TKA with gap technique showed no difference in postoperative rotational alignment between classical and anatomical method.
