header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Research

CORONAL ALIGNMENT OF TIBIAL COMPONENT IN CONVENTIONAL TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY: CAN WE STILL IMPROVE IT?

The British Orthopaedic Research Society (BORS) Annual Meeting 2020, held online, 7–8 September 2020.



Abstract

Abstract

Introduction

Long term survivorship in Total Knee Arthroplasty is significantly dependent on prosthesis alignment. The aim of this study was to determine, compare and analyse the coronal alignment of the tibial component of a single implant system using 3 different techniques.

Method

Retrospective study of cases from a prospectively collected database. Radiological assessment included measurement of the coronal alignment of tibial components of total knee arthroplasties, and its deviation from the mechanical axis. A comparison study of intramedullary, extramedullary and tibial crest alignment methods was performed.

Results

66 consecutive patients (3 groups of 22 each). Mean BMI was 26. The mean angle of deviation from the mechanical axis was significantly lesser (p< 0.05) in the Tibial crest alignment group patients compared to the other 2 groups. Moreover, the number of outliers (+/-3 degrees) were 2 and 4 in the intra and extramedullary group, whereas there were none in the tibial crest group. The inter and intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.8 and 0.9 respectively.

Conclusion

The Tibial Crest Alignment Technique is an effective technique to produce consistent results to achieve optimal coronal alignment of the tibial component in TKA, even in patients with high BMI.

Declaration of Interest

(b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.