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

General Orthopaedics

THE AMOUNT OF TIBIAL SLOPE DOES NOT AFFECT THE LEVEL OF MAXIMUM FLEXION: REVIEW OF 123 NAVIGATED TKAS

Computer Assisted Orthopaedic Surgery (CAOS) 13th Annual Meeting of CAOS International



Abstract

The Columbus® knee system was designed as a standard knee implant that allows high flexion without the need for additional bone resection. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the correlation between the maximum flexion achieved at five years and the slope of the tibial component. The hypothesis was that increased slope would give increased flexion.

The study design was a retrospective cohort study at a single centre. The inclusion criterion was having had a navigated cemented Columbus primary TKA implanted between March 2005 and December 2006 using the image free OrthoPilot® navigation system (Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany) in our institution. Follow-up had been carried out at review clinics by an independent arthroplasty team. Patient-related data had been recorded either in case notes, the departmental proprietary database or as radiographic images. In addition to demographics, five-year follow-up range of motion (ROM) was collected. All available radiographs on the national Picture Archiving and Communication System (Eastman Kodak Company, 10.1_SP1, 2006), whether taken at our institution or at the patient's local hospital, were analysed by a trainee orthopaedic surgeon (NCS) who was independent of the patients' care. Component position according to the Knee Society TKA scoring system was determined from the five-year review lateral x-ray. The tibial slope was calculated as 90° minus the angle of the tibial component so giving a posterior slope as a positive number and an anterior slope as a negative number. The correlation between maximum flexion angle and tibial slope was calculated. Further to this a subgroup of only CR prostheses and patients with BMI <35 were analysed for a relationship. The tibial slope of the group of patients having 90° or less of flexion (poor flexion) was compared to those having 110° or more (good flexion) using a t-test, as was the flexion of the those with BMI <30 to those with BMI > 35.

A total of 219 knees in 205 patients were identified. 123 had five-year radiograph and maximum flexion measurement available. Cohort demographics were mean age 68(8.6), mean BMI 32.0(5.9) and mean maximum flexion at five years of 101°(11°). The tibial slope angle showed variation around the mean of 2°(2.8°). There was no correlation between tibial slope and maximum flexion for either that whole cohort (r=-0.051, p=0.572, Figure 1b) or the subgroup of CR and BMI <35 patients (n=78, r = −0.089, p=0.438). The mean tibial slope of those patients having poor flexion was 2° (SD2.6°) and this was not significantly different to the mean for those with good flexion, 3° (SD3.1°) p=0.614. The mean flexion of those with BMI <30 was 100° (SD8.7°) and this was not significantly different to those with BMI >35, mean 101° (SD11.4°).

This study did not find any correlation between the tibial slope and maximum flexion angle in 123 TKAs at five year follow up. Further studies with a more accurate measurement of tibial slope should be carried out to confirm whether a relationship exists in the clinical setting.