The kinematic alignment (KA) approach to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has recently increased in popularity. Accordingly, a number of derivatives have arisen and have caused confusion. Clarification is therefore needed for a better understanding of KA-TKA. Calipered (or true, pure) KA is performed by cutting the bone parallel to the articular surface, compensating for cartilage wear. In soft-tissue respecting KA, the tibial cutting surface is decided parallel to the femoral cutting surface (or trial component) with in-line traction. These approaches are categorized as unrestricted KA because there is no consideration of leg alignment or component orientation. Restricted KA is an approach where the periarthritic joint surface is replicated within a safe range, due to concerns about extreme alignments that have been considered ‘alignment outliers’ in the neutral mechanical alignment approach. More recently, functional alignment and inverse kinematic alignment have been advocated, where bone cuts are made following intraoperative planning, using intraoperative measurements acquired with computer assistance to fulfill good coordination of soft-tissue balance and alignment. The KA-TKA approach aims to restore the patients’ own harmony of three knee elements (morphology, soft-tissue balance, and alignment) and eventually the patients’ own kinematics. The respective approaches start from different points corresponding to one of the elements, yet each aim for the same goal, although the existing implants and techniques have not yet perfectly fulfilled that goal

Aims. The mid-term results of kinematic alignment (KA) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using image derived instrumentation (IDI) have not been reported in detail, and questions remain regarding ligamentous stability and revisions. This paper aims to address the following: 1) what is the distribution of alignment of KA TKAs using IDI; 2) is a TKA alignment category associated with increased risk of failure or poor patient outcomes; 3) does extending limb alignment lead to changes in soft-tissue laxity; and 4) what is the five-year survivorship and outcomes of KA TKA using IDI?. Methods. A prospective, multicentre, trial enrolled 100 patients undergoing KA TKA using IDI, with follow-up to five years. Alignment measures were conducted pre- and postoperatively to assess constitutional alignment and final implant position. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of pain and function were also included. The Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Arthroplasty Registry was used to assess survivorship. Results. The postoperative HKA distribution varied from 9° varus to 11° valgus. All PROMs showed statistical improvements at one year (p < 0.001), with further improvements at five years for Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score symptoms (p = 0.041) and Forgotten Joint Score (p = 0.011). Correlation analysis showed no difference (p = 0.610) between the hip-knee-ankle and joint line congruence angle at one and five years. Sub-group analysis showed no difference in PROMs for patients placed within 3° of neutral compared to those placed > 3°. There were no revisions for tibial loosening; however, there were reports of a higher incidence of poor patella tracking and patellofemoral stiffness. Conclusion. PROMs were not impacted by postoperative alignment category. Ligamentous stability was maintained at five years with joint line obliquity. There were no revisions for tibial loosening despite a significant portion of tibiae placed in varus; however, KA executed with IDI resulted in a higher than anticipated rate of patella complications. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(8):656–665

Aims. Our aim was to compare kinematic with mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Patients and Methods. We performed a prospective blinded randomised controlled trial to compare the functional outcome of patients undergoing TKA in mechanical alignment (MA) with those in kinematic alignment (KA). A total of 71 patients undergoing TKA were randomised to either kinematic (n = 36) or mechanical alignment (n = 35). Pre- and post-operative hip-knee-ankle radiographs were analysed. The knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), American Knee Society Score, Short Form-36, Euro-Qol (EQ-5D), range of movement (ROM), two minute walk, and timed up and go tests were assessed pre-operatively and at six weeks, three and six months and one year post-operatively. Results. A total of 78% of the kinematically aligned group (28 patients) and 77% of the mechanically aligned group (27 patients) were within 3° of their pre-operative plan. There were no statistically significant differences in the mean KOOS (difference 1.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) -9.4 to 12.1, p = 0.80), EQ-5D (difference 0.8, 95% CI -7.9 to 9.6, p = 0.84), ROM (difference 0.1, 95% CI -6.0 to 6.1, p = 0.99), two minute distance tolerance (difference 20.0, 95% CI -52.8 to 92.8, p = 0.58), or timed up and go (difference 0.78, 95% CI -2.3 to 3.9, p = 0.62) between the groups at one year. Conclusion. Kinematically aligned TKAs appear to have comparable short-term results to mechanically aligned TKAs with no significant differences in function one year post-operatively. Further research is required to see if any theoretical long-term functional benefits of kinematic alignment are realised or if there are any potential effects on implant survival. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1360–8

Aims. The results of kinematic total knee arthroplasty (KTKA) have been reported in terms of limb and component alignment parameters but not in terms of gap laxities and differentials. In kinematic alignment (KA), balance should reflect the asymmetrical balance of the normal knee, not the classic rectangular flexion and extension gaps sought with gap-balanced mechanical axis total knee arthroplasty (MATKA). This paper aims to address the following questions: 1) what factors determine coronal joint congruence as measured on standing radiographs?; 2) is flexion gap asymmetry produced with KA?; 3) does lateral flexion gap laxity affect outcomes?; 4) is lateral flexion gap laxity associated with lateral extension gap laxity?; and 5) can consistent ligament balance be produced without releases?. Patients and Methods. A total of 192 KTKAs completed by a single surgeon using a computer-assisted technique were followed for a mean of 3.5 years (2 to 5). There were 116 male patients (60%) and 76 female patients (40%) with a mean age of 65 years (48 to 88). Outcome measures included intraoperative gap laxity measurements and component positions, as well as joint angles from postoperative three-foot standing radiographs. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were analyzed in terms of alignment and balance: EuroQol (EQ)-5D visual analogue scale (VAS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), KOOS Joint Replacement (JR), and Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Results. Postoperative limb alignment did not affect outcomes. The standing hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle was the sole positive predictor of the joint line convergence angle (JLCA) (p < 0.001). Increasing lateral flexion gap laxity was consistently associated with better outcomes. Lateral flexion gap laxity did not correlate with HKA angle, the JLCA, or lateral extension gap laxity. Minor releases were required in one third of cases. Conclusion. The standing HKA angle is the primary determinant of the JLCA in KTKA. A rectangular flexion gap is produced in only 11% of cases. Lateral flexion gap laxity is consistently associated with better outcomes and does not affect balance in extension. Minor releases are sometimes required as well, particularly in limbs with larger preoperative deformities. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:331–339

Aims. Nearly 99,000 total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) are performed in UK annually. Despite plenty of research, the satisfaction rate of this surgery is around 80%. One of the important intraoperative factors affecting the outcome is alignment. The relationship between joint obliquity and functional outcomes is not well understood. Therefore, a study is required to investigate and compare the effects of two types of alignment (mechanical and kinematic) on functional outcomes and range of motion. Methods. The aim of the study is to compare navigated kinematically aligned TKAs (KA TKAs) with navigated mechanically aligned TKA (MA TKA) in terms of function and ROM. We aim to recruit a total of 96 patients in the trial. The patients will be recruited from clinics of various consultants working in the trust after screening them for eligibility criteria and obtaining their informed consent to participate in this study. Randomization will be done prior to surgery by a software. The primary outcome measure will be the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score The secondary outcome measures include Oxford Knee Score, ROM, EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire, EuroQol visual analogue scale, 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), and Forgotten Joint Score. The scores will be calculated preoperatively and then at six weeks, six months, and one year after surgery. The scores will undergo a statistical analysis. Discussion. There is no clear evidence on the best alignment for a knee arthroplasty. This randomized controlled trial will test the null hypothesis that navigated KA TKAs do not perform better than navigated MA TKAs. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(11):945–950

Aims. The goal was to evaluate tibiofemoral knee joint kinematics during stair descent, by simulating the full stair descent motion in vitro. The knee joint kinematics were evaluated for two types of knee implants: bi-cruciate retaining and bi-cruciate stabilized. It was hypothesized that the bi-cruciate retaining implant better approximates native kinematics. Methods. The in vitro study included 20 specimens which were tested during a full stair descent with physiological muscle forces in a dynamic knee rig. Laxity envelopes were measured by applying external loading conditions in varus/valgus and internal/external direction. Results. The laxity results show that both implants are capable of mimicking the native internal/external-laxity during the controlled lowering phase. The kinematic results show that the bi-cruciate retaining implant tends to approximate the native condition better compared to bi-cruciate stabilized implant. This is valid for the internal/external rotation and the anteroposterior translation during all phases of the stair descent, and for the compression-distraction of the knee joint during swing and controlled lowering phase. Conclusion. The results show a better approximation of the native kinematics by the bi-cruciate retaining knee implant compared to the bi-cruciate stabilized knee implant for internal/external rotation and anteroposterior translation. Whether this will result in better patient outcomes remains to be investigated. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(4):285–293

Aims. This study aimed to analyze kinematics and kinetics of the tibiofemoral joint in healthy subjects with valgus, neutral, and varus limb alignment throughout multiple gait activities using dynamic videofluoroscopy. Methods. Five subjects with valgus, 12 with neutral, and ten with varus limb alignment were assessed during multiple complete cycles of level walking, downhill walking, and stair descent using a combination of dynamic videofluoroscopy, ground reaction force plates, and optical motion capture. Following 2D/3D registration, tibiofemoral kinematics and kinetics were compared between the three limb alignment groups. Results. No significant differences for the rotational or translational patterns between the different limb alignment groups were found for level walking, downhill walking, or stair descent. Neutral and varus aligned subjects showed a mean centre of rotation located on the medial condyle for the loaded stance phase of all three gait activities. Valgus alignment, however, resulted in a centrally located centre of rotation for level and downhill walking, but a more medial centre of rotation during stair descent. Knee adduction/abduction moments were significantly influenced by limb alignment, with an increasing knee adduction moment from valgus through neutral to varus. Conclusion. Limb alignment was not reflected in the condylar kinematics, but did significantly affect the knee adduction moment. Variations in frontal plane limb alignment seem not to be a main modulator of condylar kinematics. The presented data provide insights into the influence of anatomical parameters on tibiofemoral kinematics and kinetics towards enhancing clinical decision-making and surgical restoration of natural knee joint motion and loading. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2024;13(9):485–496

Aims. Alternative alignment concepts, including kinematic and restricted kinematic, have been introduced to help improve clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical results, along with patient satisfaction, following TKA using the concept of restricted kinematic alignment. Methods. A total of 121 consecutive TKAs performed between 11 February 2018 to 11 June 2019 with preoperative varus deformity were reviewed at minimum one-year follow-up. Three knees were excluded due to severe preoperative varus deformity greater than 15°, and a further three due to requiring revision surgery, leaving 109 patients and 115 knees to undergo primary TKA using the concept of restricted kinematic alignment with advanced technology. Patients were stratified into three groups based on the preoperative limb varus deformity: Group A with 1° to 5° varus (43 knees); Group B between 6° and 10° varus (56 knees); and Group C with varus greater than 10° (16 knees). This study group was compared with a matched cohort of 115 TKAs and 115 patients using a neutral mechanical alignment target with manual instruments performed from 24 October 2016 to 14 January 2019. Results. Mean overall patient satisfaction for the entire cohort was 4.7 (SE 0.1) on a 5-point Likert scale, with 93% being either very satisfied or satisfied compared with a Likert of 4.3 and patient satisfaction of 81% in the mechanical alignment group (p < 0.001 and p < 0.006 respectively). At mean follow-up of 17 months (11 to 27), the mean overall Likert, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Forgotten Joint Score, and Knee Society Knee and Function Scores were significantly better in the kinematic group than in the neutral mechanical alignment group. The most common complication in both groups was contracture requiring manipulation under anaesthesia, involving seven knees (6.1%) in the kinematic group and nine knees (7.8%) in the mechanical alignment group. Conclusion. With the advent of advanced technology, and the ability to obtain accurate bone cuts, the target limb alignment, and soft-tissue balance within millimetres, using a restricted kinematic alignment concept demonstrated excellent patient satisfaction following primary TKA. Longer-term analysis is required as to the durability of this method. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):59–66

Aims. Patient dissatisfaction is not uncommon following primary total knee arthroplasty. One proposed method to alleviate this is by improving knee kinematics. Therefore, we aimed to answer the following research question: are there significant differences in knee kinematics based on the design of the tibial insert (cruciate-retaining (CR), ultra-congruent (UC), or medial congruent (MC))?. Methods. Overall, 15 cadaveric knee joints were examined with a CR implant with three different tibial inserts (CR, UC, and MC) using an established knee joint simulator. The effects on coronal alignment, medial and lateral femoral roll back, femorotibial rotation, bony rotations (femur, tibia, and patella), and patellofemoral length ratios were determined. Results. No statistically significant differences were found regarding coronal alignment (p = 0.087 to p = 0.832). The medial congruent insert demonstrated restricted femoral roll back (mean medial 37.57 mm; lateral 36.34 mm), while the CR insert demonstrated the greatest roll back (medial 42.21 mm; lateral 37.88 mm; p < 0.001, respectively). Femorotibial rotation was greatest with the CR insert with 2.45° (SD 4.75°), then the UC insert with 1.31° (SD 4.15°; p < 0.001), and lowest with the medial congruent insert with 0.8° (SD 4.24°; p < 0.001). The most pronounced patella shift, but lowest patellar rotation, was noted with the CR insert. Conclusion. The MC insert demonstrated the highest level of constraint of these inserts. Femoral roll back, femorotibial rotation, and single bony rotations were lowest with the MC insert. The patella showed less shifting with the MC insert, but there was significantly increased rotation. While the medial congruent insert was found to have highest constraint, it remains uncertain if this implant recreates native knee kinematics or if this will result in improved patient satisfaction. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(7):592–600

Aims. Modern total knee arthroplasty (TKA) prostheses are designed to restore near normal kinematics including high flexion. Kneeling is a high flexion, kinematically demanding activity after TKA. The debate about design choice has not yet been informed by six-degrees-of-freedom in vivo kinematics. This prospective randomized clinical trial compared kneeling kinematics in three TKA designs. Methods. In total, 68 patients were randomized to either a posterior stabilized (PS-FB), cruciate-retaining (CR-FB), or rotating platform (CR-RP) design. Of these patients, 64 completed a minimum one year follow-up. Patients completed full-flexion kneeling while being imaged using single-plane fluoroscopy. Kinematics were calculated by registering the 3D implant models onto 2D-dynamic fluoroscopic images and exported for analysis. Results. CR-FB designs had significantly lower maximal flexion (mean 116° (SD 2.1°)) compared to CR-RP (123° (SD 1.6°)) and PS-FB (125° (SD 2.1°)). The PS-FB design displayed a more posteriorly positioned femur throughout flexion. Furthermore, the CR-RP femur was more externally rotated throughout kneeling. Finally, individual patient kinematics showed high degrees of variability within all designs. Conclusion. The increased maximal flexion found in the PS-FB and CR-RP designs were likely achieved in different ways. The PS-FB design uses a cam-post to hold the femur more posteriorly preventing posterior impingement. The external rotation within the CR-RP design was surprising and hasn’t previously been reported. It is likely due to the polyethylene bearing being decoupled from flexion. The findings of this study provide insights into the function of different knee arthroplasty designs in the context during deep kneeling and provide clinicians with a more kinematically informed choice for implant selection and may allow improved management of patients' functional expectations. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):105–112

Aims. The removal of the cruciate ligaments in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been suggested as a potential contributing factor to patient dissatisfaction, due to alteration of the in vivo biomechanics of the knee. Bicruciate retaining (BCR) TKA allows the preservation of the cruciate ligaments, thus offering the potential to reproduce healthy kinematics. The aim of this study was to compare in vivo kinematics between the operated and contralateral knee in patients who have undergone TKA with a contemporary BCR design. Methods. A total of 29 patients who underwent unilateral BCR TKA were evaluated during single-leg deep lunges and sit-to-stand tests using a validated computer tomography and fluoroscopic imaging system. In vivo six-degrees of freedom (6DOF) kinematics were compared between the BCR TKA and the contralateral knee. Results. During single-leg deep lunge, BCR TKAs showed significantly less mean posterior femoral translation (13 mm; standard deviation (SD) 4) during terminal flexion, compared with the contralateral knee (16.6 mm, SD 3.7; p = 0.001). Similarly, BCR TKAs showed significantly less mean femoral rollback (11.6 mm (SD 4.5) vs 14.4 mm (SD 4.6); p < 0.043) during sit-to-stand. BCR TKAs showed significantly reduced internal rotation during many parts of the strenuous flexion activities particularly during high-flexion lunge (4° (SD 5.6°) vs 6.5° (SD 6.1°); p = 0.051) and during sit-to-stand (4.5° (SD 6°) vs 6.9° (SD 6.3°); p = 0.048). Conclusion. The contemporary design of BCR TKA showed asymmetrical flexion-extension and internal-external rotation, suggesting that the kinematics are not entirely reproduced during strenuous activities. Future studies are required to establish the importance of patient factors, component orientation and design, in optimizing kinematics in patients who undergo BCR TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6 Supple A):59–65

Aims. This study aims to investigate the effects of posterior tibial slope (PTS) on knee kinematics involved in the post-cam mechanism in bi-cruciate stabilized (BCS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using computer simulation. Methods. In total, 11 different PTS (0° to 10°) values were simulated to evaluate the effect of PTS on anterior post-cam contact conditions and knee kinematics in BCS TKA during weight-bearing stair climbing (from 86° to 6° of knee flexion). Knee kinematics were expressed as the lowest points of the medial and lateral femoral condyles on the surface of the tibial insert, and the anteroposterior translation of the femoral component relative to the tibial insert. Results. Anterior post-cam contact in BCS TKA was observed with the knee near full extension if PTS was 6° or more. BCS TKA showed a bicondylar roll forward movement from 86° to mid-flexion, and two different patterns from mid-flexion to knee extension: screw home movement without anterior post-cam contact and bicondylar roll forward movement after anterior post-cam contact. Knee kinematics in the simulation showed similar trends to the clinical in vivo data and were almost within the range of inter-specimen variability. Conclusion. Postoperative knee kinematics in BCS TKA differed according to PTS and anterior post-cam contact; in particular, anterior post-cam contact changed knee kinematics, which may affect the patient’s perception of the knee during activities. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(11):761–767

Aims. Commonly performed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is not designed for the lateral compartment. Additionally, the anatomical medial and lateral tibial plateaus have asymmetrical geometries, with a slightly dished medial plateau and a convex lateral plateau. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the native knee kinematics with respect to the tibial insert design corresponding to the lateral femoral component. Methods. Subject-specific finite element models were developed with tibiofemoral (TF) and patellofemoral joints for one female and four male subjects. Three different TF conformity designs were applied. Flat, convex, and conforming tibial insert designs were applied to the identical femoral component. A deep knee bend was considered as the loading condition, and the kinematic preservation in the native knee was investigated. Results. The convex design, the femoral rollback, and internal rotation were similar to those of the native knee. However, the conforming design showed a significantly decreased femoral rollback and internal rotation compared with that of the native knee (p < 0.05). The flat design showed a significant difference in the femoral rollback; however, there was no difference in the tibial internal rotation compared with that of the native knee. Conclusion. The geometry of the surface of the lateral tibial plateau determined the ability to restore the rotational kinematics of the native knee. Surgeons and implant designers should consider the geometry of the anatomical lateral tibial plateau as an important factor in the restoration of native knee kinematics after lateral UKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2019;8:593–600

Aims. This study aimed to evaluate if total knee arthroplasty (TKA) femoral components aligned in either mechanical alignment (MA) or kinematic alignment (KA) are more biomimetic concerning trochlear sulcus orientation and restoration of trochlear height. Methods. Bone surfaces from 1,012 CT scans of non-arthritic femora were segmented using a modelling and analytics system. TKA femoral components (Triathlon; Stryker) were virtually implanted in both MA and KA. Trochlear sulcus orientation was assessed by measuring the distal trochlear sulcus angle (DTSA) in native femora and in KA and MA prosthetic femoral components. Trochlear anatomy restoration was evaluated by measuring the differences in medial, lateral, and sulcus trochlear height between native femora and KA and MA prosthetic femoral components. Results. Femoral components in both MA and KA alignments exhibited a more valgus DTSA compared to native femora. However, DTSA deviation from native was significantly less in KA than in MA (4.8° (SD 2.2°) vs 8.8° (SD 1.8°); p < 0.001). DTSA deviation from native orientation correlated positively with the mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA) in KA and negatively in MA (r = 0.53, p < 0.001; r = -0.18, p < 0.001). Medial trochlear height was not restored with either MA or KA, with MA resulting in lower medial trochlear height than KA in the proximal 20% of the trochlea. Lateral and sulcus trochlear height was not restored with either alignment in the proximal 80% of the trochlea. At the terminal arc point, KA replicated sulcus and lateral trochlear height, while MA led to over-restoration. Conclusion. Femoral components aligned in KA demonstrated greater biomimetic qualities than those in MA regarding trochlear sulcus orientation and trochlear height restoration, particularly in valgus femora. Variability across knees was observed, warranting further research to evaluate the clinical implications of these findings. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(8):817–825

Objectives. Little biomechanical information is available about kinematically aligned (KA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to simulate the kinematics and kinetics after KA TKA and mechanically aligned (MA) TKA with four different limb alignments. Materials and Methods. Bone models were constructed from one volunteer (normal) and three patients with three different knee deformities (slight, moderate and severe varus). A dynamic musculoskeletal modelling system was used to analyse the kinematics and the tibiofemoral contact force. The contact stress on the tibial insert, and the stress to the resection surface and medial tibial cortex were examined by using finite element analysis. Results. In all bone models, posterior translation on the lateral side and external rotation in the KA TKA models were greater than in the MA TKA models. The tibiofemoral force at the medial side was increased in the moderate and severe varus models with KA TKA. In the severe varus model with KA TKA, the contact stress on the tibial insert and the stress to the resection surface and to the medial tibial cortex were increased by 41.5%, 32.2% and 53.7%, respectively, compared with MA TKA, and the bone strain at the medial side was highest among all models. Conclusion. Near normal kinematics was observed in KA TKA. However, KA TKA increased the contact force, stress and bone strain at the medial side for moderate and severe varus knee models. The application of KA TKA for severe varus knees may be inadequate. Cite this article: S. Nakamura, Y. Tian, Y. Tanaka, S. Kuriyama, H. Ito, M. Furu, S. Matsuda. The effects of kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty on stress at the medial tibia: A case study for varus knee. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:43–51. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.61.BJR-2016-0090.R1

Aims. The aims of this study were: 1) to describe extended restricted kinematic alignment (E-rKA), a novel alignment strategy during robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA); 2) to compare residual medial compartment tightness following virtual surgical planning during RA-TKA using mechanical alignment (MA) and E-rKA, in the same set of osteoarthritic varus knees; 3) to assess the requirement of soft-tissue releases during RA-TKA using E-rKA; and 4) to compare the accuracy of surgical plan execution between knees managed with adjustments in component positioning alone, and those which require additional soft-tissue releases. Methods. Patients who underwent RA-TKA between January and December 2022 for primary varus osteoarthritis were included. Safe boundaries for E-rKA were defined. Residual medial compartment tightness was compared following virtual surgical planning using E-rKA and MA, in the same set of knees. Soft-tissue releases were documented. Errors in postoperative alignment in relation to planned alignment were compared between patients who did (group A) and did not (group B) require soft-tissue releases. Results. The use of E-rKA helped restore all knees within the predefined boundaries, with appropriate soft-tissue balancing. E-rKA compared with MA resulted in reduced residual medial tightness following surgical planning, in full extension (2.71 mm (SD 1.66) vs 5.16 mm (SD 3.10), respectively; p < 0.001), and 90° of flexion (2.52 mm (SD 1.63) vs 6.27 mm (SD 3.11), respectively; p < 0.001). Among the study population, 156 patients (78%) were managed with minor adjustments in component positioning alone, while 44 (22%) required additional soft-tissue releases. The mean errors in postoperative alignment were 0.53 mm and 0.26 mm among patients in group A and group B, respectively (p = 0.328). Conclusion. E-rKA is an effective and reproducible alignment strategy during RA-TKA, permitting a large proportion of patients to be managed without soft-tissue releases. The execution of minor alterations in component positioning within predefined multiplanar boundaries is a better starting point for gap management than soft-tissue releases. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(8):628–636

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare robotic arm-assisted bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) with conventional mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in order to determine the changes in the anatomy of the knee and alignment of the lower limb following surgery. Methods. An analysis of 38 patients who underwent TKA and 32 who underwent bi-UKA was performed as a secondary study from a prospective, single-centre, randomized controlled trial. CT imaging was used to measure coronal, sagittal, and axial alignment of the knee preoperatively and at three months postoperatively to determine changes in anatomy that had occurred as a result of the surgery. The hip-knee-ankle angle (HKAA) was also measured to identify any differences between the two groups. Results. The pre- to postoperative changes in joint anatomy were significantly less in patients undergoing bi-UKA in all three planes in both the femur and tibia, except for femoral sagittal component orientation in which there was no difference. Overall, for the six parameters of alignment (three femoral and three tibial), 47% of bi-UKAs and 24% TKAs had a change of < 2° (p = 0.045). The change in HKAA towards neutral in varus and valgus knees was significantly less in patients undergoing bi-UKA compared with those undergoing TKA (p < 0.001). Alignment was neutral in those undergoing TKA (mean 179.5° (SD 3.2°)) while those undergoing bi-UKA had mild residual varus or valgus alignment (mean 177.8° (SD 3.4°)) (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Robotic-assisted, cruciate-sparing bi-UKA maintains the natural anatomy of the knee in the coronal, sagittal, and axial planes better, and may therefore preserve normal joint kinematics, compared with a mechanically aligned TKA. This includes preservation of coronal joint line obliquity. HKAA alignment was corrected towards neutral significantly less in patients undergoing bi-UKA, which may represent restoration of the pre-disease constitutional alignment (p < 0.001). Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1511–1518

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the post-operative radiographic and clinical outcomes between kinematically and mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). . Patients and Methods. A total of 60 TKAs (30 kinematically and 30 mechanically aligned) were performed in 60 patients with varus osteoarthritis of the knee using a navigation system. The angles of orientation of the joint line in relation to the floor, the conventional and true mechanical axis (tMA) (the line from the centre of the hip to the lowest point of the calcaneus) were compared, one year post-operatively, on single-leg and double-leg standing long leg radiographs between the groups. The range of movement and 2011 Knee Society Scores were also compared between the groups at that time. Results. The angles of orientation of the joint line in the kinematic group changed from slight varus on double-leg standing to slight valgus with single-leg standing. The mechanical axes in the kinematic group passed through a neutral position of the knee in the true condition when the calcaneus was considered. The post-operative angles of flexion and functional activity scores were significantly better in the kinematic than in the mechanical group (p < 0.003 and 0.03, respectively). Conclusion. A kinematically aligned TKA results in a joint line which has a more parallel orientation in relation to the floor during single- and double-leg standing, and more neutral weight-bearing in tMA than a mechanically aligned TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:640–6

Aims. Functional alignment (FA) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) aims to achieve balanced gaps by adjusting implant positioning while minimizing changes to constitutional joint line obliquity (JLO). Although FA uses kinematic alignment (KA) as a starting point, the final implant positions can vary significantly between these two approaches. This study used the Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification to compare differences between KA and final FA positions. Methods. A retrospective analysis compared pre-resection and post-implantation alignments in 2,116 robotic-assisted FA TKAs. The lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA) and medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) were measured to determine the arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA = MPTA – LDFA), JLO (JLO = MPTA + LDFA), and CPAK type. The primary outcome was the proportion of knees that varied ≤ 2° for aHKA and ≤ 3° for JLO from their KA to FA positions, and direction and magnitude of those changes per CPAK phenotype. Secondary outcomes included proportion of knees that maintained their CPAK phenotype, and differences between sexes. Results. Overall, 71.6% had an aHKA change ≤ 2°, and 87.0% a JLO change ≤ 3°. Mean aHKA changed from -1.1° (SD 2.8°) in KA to -1.9° (SD 2.3°) in FA (mean difference (MD) -0.83 (SD 2.0); p < 0.001). Mean JLO changed from 173.9° (SD 3.0°) in KA to 174.2° (SD 2.6°) in FA (MD 0.38 (SD 2.3); p < 0.001). CPAK type was maintained in 58.1% of knees, with the proportion highest for Types I (73.9%), II (61.1%), and IV (51.2%). In valgus knees, 67.5% of Type III and 71.7% of Type VI were shifted to neutral phenotypes. There was minimal change to constitutional JLO across all CPAK types (MDs -2.0° to 1.2°). Conclusion. Functional alignment may alter CPAK type, but does not significantly change JLO. A kinematic starting point minimizes changes to native anatomy, while final position with FA provides an optimally balanced TKA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(12):1081–1091

Abnormal sagittal kinematics after total knee replacement (TKR) can adversely affect functional outcome. Two important determinants of knee kinematics are component geometry and the presence or absence of a posterior-stabilising mechanism (cam-post). We investigated the influence of these variables by comparing the kinematics of a TKR with a polyradial femur with a single radius design, both with and without a cam-post mechanism. We assessed 55 patients, subdivided into four groups, who had undergone a TKR one year earlier by using an established fluoroscopy protocol in order to examine their kinematics in vivo. The kinematic profile was obtained by measuring the patellar tendon angle through the functional knee flexion range (0° to 90°) and the results compared with 14 normal knees. All designs of TKR had abnormal sagittal kinematics compared with the normal knee. There was a significant (p < 0.05) difference between those of the two TKRs near to full extension. The presence of the cam-post mechanism did not influence the kinematics for either TKR design. These differences suggest that surface geometry is a stronger determinant of kinematics than the presence or absence of a cam-post mechanism for these two designs. This may be because the cam-post mechanism is ineffective