header advert
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 102-B, Issue SUPP_6 | Pages 9 - 9
1 Jul 2020
Vendittoli P Blakeney W Kiss M Riviere C Puliero B Beaulieu Y
Full Access

Mechanical alignment (MA) techniques for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may introduce significant anatomic modifications, as it is known that few patients have neutral femoral, tibial or overall lower limb mechanical axes.

A total of 1000 knee CT-Scans were analyzed from a database of patients undergoing TKA. MA tibial and femoral bone resections were simulated. Femoral rotation was aligned with either the trans-epicondylar axis (TEA) or with 3° of external rotation to the posterior condyles (PC). Medial-lateral (DML) and flexion-extension (DFE) gap differences were calculated.

Extension space ML imbalances (3mm) occurred in 25% of varus and 54% of valgus knees and significant imbalances (5mm) were present in up to 8% of varus and 19% of valgus knees. For the flexion space DML, higher imbalance rates were created by the TEA technique (p < 0 .001). In valgus knees, TEA resulted in a DML in flexion of 5 mm in 42%, compared to 7% for PC. In varus knees both techniques performed better. When all the differences between DML and DFE are considered together, using TEA there were 18% of valgus knees and 49% of varus knees with < 3 mm imbalances throughout, and using PC 32% of valgus knees and 64% of varus knees.

Significant anatomic modifications with related ML or FE gap imbalances are created using MA for TKA. Using MA techniques, PC creates less imbalances than TEA. Some of these imbalances may not be correctable by the surgeon and may explain post-operative TKA instability. Current imaging technology could predict preoperatively these intrinsic imitations of MA. Other alignment techniques that better reproduce knee anatomies should be explored.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 102-B, Issue SUPP_6 | Pages 54 - 54
1 Jul 2020
Vendittoli P Blakeney W Kiss M Puliero B Beaulieu Y
Full Access

Mechanical alignment (MA) techniques for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) introduces significant anatomic modifications and secondary ligament imbalances. A restricted kinematic alignment (rKA) protocol was proposed to minimise these issues and improve TKA clinical results.

A total of 1000 knee CT-Scans were analyzed from a database of patients undergoing TKA. rKA tibial and femoral bone resections were simulated. rKA is defined by the following criteria: Independent tibial and femoral cuts within ± 5° of the bone neutral mechanical axis and, a resulting HKA within ± 3° of neutral. Medial-lateral (ΔML) and flexion-extension (ΔFE) gap differences were calculated and compared with MA results. With the MA technique, femoral rotation was aligned with either the trans-epicondylar axis (TEA) or with 3° of external rotation to the posterior condyles (PC).

Extension space ML imbalances (>/=3mm) occurred in 33% of TKA with MA technique versus 8% of the knees with rKA (p /=5mm) were present in up to 11% of MA knees versus 1% rKA (p < 0 .001). Using the MA technique, for the flexion space ΔML, higher imbalance rates were created by the TEA technique (p < 0 .001). rKA again performed better than both MA techniques using TEA of 3 degrees PC techniques (p < 0 .001). When all the differences between ΔML and ΔFE are considered together: using TEA there were 40.8% of the knees with < 3 mm imbalances throughout, using PC this was 55.3% and using rKA it was 91.5% of the knees (p < 0 .001).

Significantly less anatomic modifications with related ML or FE gap imbalances are created using rKA versus MA for TKA. Using rKA may help the surgeon to balance a TKA, whilst keeping the alignment within a safe range.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 102-B, Issue SUPP_1 | Pages 11 - 11
1 Feb 2020
Blakeney W Beaulieu Y Kiss M Vendittoli P
Full Access

Background

Mechanical alignment (MA) techniques for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) introduce significant anatomic modifications and secondary ligament imbalances. A restricted kinematic alignment (rKA) protocol was proposed to minimize these issues and improve TKA clinical results.

Method

rKA tibial and femoral bone resections were simulated on 1000 knee CT-Scans from a database of patients undergoing TKA. rKA is defined by the following criteria: Independent tibial and femoral cuts within ± 5° of the bone neutral mechanical axis and; a resulting HKA within ±3° of neutral. Medial-lateral (ΔML) and flexion-extension (ΔFE) gap differences were calculated and compared with measured resection MA results.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 102-B, Issue SUPP_1 | Pages 10 - 10
1 Feb 2020
Vendittoli P Blakeney W Puliero B Beaulieu Y Kiss M
Full Access

INTRODUCTION

Mechanical alignment in TKA introduces significant anatomic modifications for many individuals, which may result in unequal medial-lateral or flexion-extension bone resections. The objective of this study was to calculate bone resection thicknesses and resulting gap sizes, simulating a measured resection mechanical alignment technique for TKA.

METHODS

Measured resection mechanical alignment bone resections were simulated on 1000 consecutive lower limb CT-Scans from patients undergoing TKA. Bone resections were simulated to reproduce the following measured resection mechanical alignment surgical technique. The distal femoral and proximal tibial cuts were perpendicular to the mechanical axis, setting the resection depth at 8mm from the most distal femoral condyle and from the most proximal tibial plateau (Figure 1). If the resection of the contralateral side was <0mm, the resection level was increased such that the minimum resection was 0mm. An 8mm resection thickness was based on an implant size of 10mm (bone +2mm of cartilage). Femoral rotation was aligned with either the trans-epicondylar axis or with 3 degrees of external rotation to the posterior condyles. After simulation of the bone cuts, media-lateral gap difference and flexion-extension gaps difference were calculated. The gap sizes were calculated as the sum of the femoral and tibial bone resections, with a target bone resection of 16mm (+ cartilage corresponding to the implant thickness).