34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      What is the optimal alignment of the tibial and femoral components in knee arthroplasty? : An overview of the literature

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Surgeon-dependent factors such as optimal implant alignment are thought to play a significant role in outcome following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Exact definitions and references for optimal alignment are, however, still being debated. This overview of the literature describes different definitions of component alignment following primary TKA for (1) tibiofemoral alignment in the AP plane, (2) tibial and femoral component placement in the AP plane, (3) tibial and femoral component placement in the sagittal plane, and (4) rotational alignment of tibial and femoral components and their role in outcome and implant survival.

          Methods

          We performed a literature search for original and review articles on implant positioning following primary TKA. Definitions for coronal, sagittal, and rotational placement of femoral and tibial components were summarized and the influence of positioning on survival and functional outcome was considered.

          Results

          Many definitions exist when evaluating placement of femoral and tibial components. Implant alignment plays a role in both survival and functional outcome following primary TKA, as component malalignment can lead to increased failure rates, maltracking, and knee pain.

          Interpretation

          Based on currently available evidence, surgeons should aim for optimal alignment of tibial and femoral components when performing TKA.

          Related collections

          Most cited references73

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on the fifteen-year survival of modern, cemented total knee replacements.

          One long-held tenet of total knee arthroplasty is that implant durability is maximized when postoperative limb alignment is corrected to 0° ± 3° relative to the mechanical axis. Recently, substantial health-care resources have been devoted to computer navigation systems that allow surgeons to more often achieve that alignment. We hypothesized that a postoperative mechanical axis of 0° ± 3° would result in better long-term survival of total knee arthroplasty implants as compared with that in a group of outliers. Clinical and radiographic data were reviewed retrospectively to determine the fifteen-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate following 398 primary total knee arthroplasties performed with cement in 280 patients from 1985 to 1990. Preoperatively, most knees were in varus mechanical alignment (mean and standard deviation, 6° ± 8.8° of varus [range, 30° of varus to 22° of valgus]), whereas postoperatively most knees were corrected to neutral (mean and standard deviation, 0° ± 2.8° [range, 8° of varus to 9° of valgus]). Postoperatively, we defined a mechanically aligned group of 292 knees (with a mechanical axis of 0° ± 3°) and an outlier group of 106 knees (with a mechanical axis of beyond 0° ± 3°). At the time of the latest follow-up, forty-five (15.4%) of the 292 implants in the mechanically aligned group had been revised for any reason, compared with fourteen (13%) of the 106 implants in the outlier group (p = 0.88); twenty-seven (9.2%) of the 292 implants in the mechanically aligned group had been revised because of aseptic loosening, mechanical failure, wear, or patellar problems, compared with eight (7.5%) of the 106 implants in the outlier group (p = 0.88); and seventeen (5.8%) of the 292 implants in the mechanically aligned group had been revised because of aseptic loosening, mechanical failure, or wear, compared with four (3.8%) of the 106 implants in the outlier group (p = 0.49). A postoperative mechanical axis of 0° ± 3° did not improve the fifteen-year implant survival rate following these 398 modern total knee arthroplasties. We believe that describing alignment as a dichotomous variable (aligned versus malaligned) on the basis of a mechanical axis goal of 0° ± 3° is of little practical value for predicting the durability of modern total knee arthroplasty implants.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty: just how important is it?

            A recent study has challenged the premise that well-aligned total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) have better survival than outliers. This study examines the importance of overall coronal alignment as a predictor for revision. Patients with primary TKAs were stratified into neutral, varus, and valgus alignment groups based on the postoperative tibiofemoral angle. In 6070 knees (3992 patients), there were 51 failures (0.84%): 21 (0.5%) in the neutral group, 18 (1.8%) in the varus group, and 12 (1.5%) in the valgus group. The best survival was for overall alignment between 2.4 degrees and 7.2 degrees of valgus. Varus knees failed primarily by medial tibia collapse, whereas valgus knees failed from ligament instability. Outliers in overall alignment have a higher rate of revision than well-aligned knees. The goal of TKA should be to restore alignment within 2.4 degrees to 7.2 degrees of valgus.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Radiographic analysis of the axial alignment of the lower extremity.

              The axial alignment of the lower extremities of twenty-five normal male volunteers whose mean age was thirty years was studied using a standardized radiograph of the entire lower extremity. The extremities were found to be in a mean of 1.5 degrees (right) and 1.1 degrees (left) of varus angulation at the knee between the tibial and femoral mechanical axes. The transverse axis of the knee lacked a mean of 3.0 degrees (right) and 2.6 degrees (left) of being perpendicular to the mechanical axis of the tibia. The anatomical axis of the femur did not pass through the center of the knee.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Acta Orthop
                Acta Orthop
                ORT
                Acta Orthopaedica
                Informa Healthcare
                1745-3674
                1745-3682
                September 2014
                5 September 2014
                : 85
                : 5
                : 480-487
                Affiliations
                1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery
                2Clinical Orthopedic Research Hvidovre , Hvidovre University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
                Author notes
                Article
                ORT_A_940573_O
                10.3109/17453674.2014.940573
                4164865
                25036719
                f1082718-6d19-47c3-8868-a46d9cd93f28
                Copyright: © Nordic Orthopaedic Federation

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0 License which permits users to download and share the article for non-commercial purposes, so long as the article is reproduced in the whole without changes, and provided the original source is credited.

                History
                : 08 March 2013
                : 22 April 2014
                Categories
                Hip and Knee

                Orthopedics
                Orthopedics

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content219

                Cited by70

                Most referenced authors533