Limb alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) influences periarticular soft-tissue tension, biomechanics through knee flexion, and implant survival. Despite this, there is no uniform consensus on the optimal alignment technique for TKA. Neutral mechanical alignment facilitates knee flexion and symmetrical component wear but forces the limb into an unnatural position that alters native knee kinematics through the arc of knee flexion. Kinematic alignment aims to restore native limb alignment, but the safe ranges with this technique remain uncertain and the effects of this alignment technique on component survivorship remain unknown. Anatomical alignment aims to restore predisease limb alignment and knee geometry, but existing studies using this technique are based on cadaveric specimens or clinical trials with limited follow-up times. Functional alignment aims to restore the native plane and obliquity of the joint by manipulating implant positioning while limiting soft tissue releases, but the results of high-quality studies with long-term outcomes are still awaited. The drawbacks of existing studies on alignment include the use of surgical techniques with limited accuracy and reproducibility of achieving the planned alignment, poor correlation of intraoperative data to long-term functional outcomes and implant survivorship, and a paucity of studies on the safe ranges of limb alignment. Further studies on alignment in TKA should use surgical adjuncts (e.g. robotic technology) to help execute the planned alignment with improved accuracy, include intraoperative assessments of knee biomechanics and periarticular soft-tissue tension, and correlate alignment to long-term functional outcomes and survivorship.
Ideal component sizing may be difficult to achieve in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Anatomical variants, incremental implant size, and a reduced surgical exposure may lead to over- or under-sizing of the components. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of UKA sizing with robotic-assisted techniques versus a conventional surgical technique. Three groups of 93 medial UKAs were assessed. The first group was performed by a conventional technique, the second group with an image-free robotic-assisted system (Image-Free group), and the last group with an image-based robotic arm-assisted system, using a preoperative CT scan (Image-Based group). There were no demographic differences between groups. We compared six parameters on postoperative radiographs to assess UKA sizing. Incorrect sizing was defined by an over- or under-sizing greater than 3 mm.Aims
Methods
The primary aim of this study was to compare the postoperative systemic inflammatory response in conventional jig-based total knee arthroplasty (conventional TKA) versus robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (robotic TKA). Secondary aims were to compare the macroscopic soft tissue injury, femoral and tibial bone trauma, localized thermal response, and the accuracy of component positioning between the two treatment groups. This prospective randomized controlled trial included 30 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee undergoing conventional TKA versus robotic TKA. Predefined serum markers of inflammation and localized knee temperature were collected preoperatively and postoperatively at six hours, day 1, day 2, day 7, and day 28 following TKA. Blinded observers used the Macroscopic Soft Tissue Injury (MASTI) classification system to grade intraoperative periarticular soft tissue injury and bone trauma. Plain radiographs were used to assess the accuracy of achieving the planned postioning of the components in both groups.Aims
Methods
It remains controversial whether patellofemoral joint pathology is a contraindication to lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of preoperative radiological degenerative changes and alignment on patient-reported outcome scores (PROMs) after lateral UKA. Secondarily, the influence of lateral UKA on the alignment of the patellofemoral joint was studied. A consecutive series of patients who underwent robotic arm-assisted fixed-bearing lateral UKA with at least two-year follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Radiological evaluation was conducted to obtain a Kellgren Lawrence (KL) grade, an Altman score, and alignment measurements for each knee. Postoperative PROMs were assessed using the Kujala (Anterior Knee Pain Scale) score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (KOOS JR), and satisfaction levels.Aims
Methods
Limited evidence is available on mid-term outcomes of robotic-arm assisted (RA) partial knee arthroplasty (PKA). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate mid-term survivorship, modes of failure, and patient-reported outcomes of RA PKA. A retrospective review of patients who underwent RA PKA between June 2007 and August 2016 was performed. Patients received a fixed-bearing medial or lateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA), or bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (BiKA; PFA plus medial UKA). All patients completed a questionnaire regarding revision surgery, reoperations, and level of satisfaction. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) were assessed using the KOOS for Joint Replacement Junior survey.Aims
Methods
Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and multiligament knee (MLK) injuries increase the risk of development of knee osteoarthritis and eventual need for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). There are limited data regarding implant use and outcomes in these patients. The aim of this study was to compare the use of constrained implants and outcomes among patients undergoing TKA with a history of prior knee ligament reconstruction (PKLR) Patients with a history of ACL or MLK reconstruction who underwent TKA between 2007 and 2017 were identified in a single-institution registry. There were 223 patients who met inclusion criteria (188 ACL reconstruction patients, 35 MLK reconstruction patients). A matched cohort, also of 223 patients, was identified based on patient age, body mass index (BMI), sex, and year of surgery. There were 144 male patients and 79 female patients in both cohorts. Mean age at the time of TKA was 57.2 years (31 to 88). Mean BMI was 29.7 kg/m2 (19.5 to 55.7).Aims
Patients and Methods
The purpose of this multicentre observational study was to investigate the association between intraoperative component positioning and soft-tissue balancing on short-term clinical outcomes in patients undergoing robotic-arm assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Between 2013 and 2016, 363 patients (395 knees) underwent robotic-arm assisted UKAs at two centres. Pre- and postoperatively, patients were administered Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Score (KOOS) and Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12). Results were stratified as “good” and “bad” if KOOS/FJS-12 were more than or equal to 80. Intraoperative, post-implantation robotic data relative to CT-based components placement were collected and classified. Postoperative complications were recorded.Aims
Patients and Methods
Aims . To assess the effect of high tibial and distal femoral osteotomies
(HTO and DFO) on the pressure characteristics of the ankle joint. Materials and Methods. Varus and valgus malalignment of the knee was simulated in human
cadaver full-length legs. Testing included four measurements: baseline
malalignment, 5° and 10° re-aligning osteotomy, and control baseline
malalignment. For HTO, testing was rerun with the subtalar joint
fixed. In order to represent half body weight, a 300 N force was applied
onto the femoral head. Intra-articular sensors captured ankle pressure. Results. In the absence of restriction of subtalar movement, insignificant
migration of the centre of force and changes of maximal pressure
were seen at the ankle joint. With restricted subtalar motion, more
significant lateralisation of the centre of force were seen with
the subtalar joint in varus than in valgus position. Changes in
maximum pressure were again not significant. . Conclusion. The re-alignment of
The lateral compartment is predominantly affected
in approximately 10% of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. The
anatomy, kinematics and loading during movement differ considerably
between medial and lateral compartments of the knee. This in the
main explains the relative protection of the lateral compartment
compared with the medial compartment in the development of osteoarthritis.
The aetiology of lateral compartment osteoarthritis can be idiopathic,
usually affecting the femur, or secondary to trauma commonly affecting
the tibia. Surgical management of lateral compartment osteoarthritis
can include osteotomy, unicompartmental knee replacement and total
knee replacement. This review discusses the biomechanics, pathogenesis
and development of lateral compartment osteoarthritis and its management. Cite this article:
