header advert
Results 1 - 5 of 5
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 2 | Pages 101 - 101
1 Feb 2023
MacDessi SJ Oussedik S Abdel MP Victor J Pagnano MW Haddad FS


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 2 | Pages 102 - 108
1 Feb 2023
MacDessi SJ Oussedik S Abdel MP Victor J Pagnano MW Haddad FS

Orthopaedic surgeons are currently faced with an overwhelming number of choices surrounding total knee arthroplasty (TKA), not only with the latest technologies and prostheses, but also fundamental decisions on alignment philosophies. From ‘mechanical’ to ‘adjusted mechanical’ to ‘restricted kinematic’ to ‘unrestricted kinematic’ — and how constitutional alignment relates to these — there is potential for ambiguity when thinking about and discussing such concepts. This annotation summarizes the various alignment strategies currently employed in TKA. It provides a clear framework and consistent language that will assist surgeons to compare confidently and contrast the concepts, while also discussing the latest opinions about alignment in TKA. Finally, it provides suggestions for applying consistent nomenclature to future research, especially as we explore the implications of 3D alignment patterns on patient outcomes.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(2):102–108.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 5 | Pages 604 - 612
1 May 2022
MacDessi SJ Wood JA Diwan A Harris IA

Aims

Intraoperative pressure sensors allow surgeons to quantify soft-tissue balance during total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this study was to determine whether using sensors to achieve soft-tissue balance was more effective than manual balancing in improving outcomes in TKA.

Methods

A multicentre randomized trial compared the outcomes of sensor balancing (SB) with manual balancing (MB) in 250 patients (285 TKAs). The primary outcome measure was the mean difference in the four Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales (ΔKOOS4) in the two groups, comparing the preoperative and two-year scores. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative balance data, additional patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and functional measures.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 2 | Pages 329 - 337
1 Feb 2021
MacDessi SJ Griffiths-Jones W Harris IA Bellemans J Chen DB

Aims

A comprehensive classification for coronal lower limb alignment with predictive capabilities for knee balance would be beneficial in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This paper describes the Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification and examines its utility in preoperative soft tissue balance prediction, comparing kinematic alignment (KA) to mechanical alignment (MA).

Methods

A radiological analysis of 500 healthy and 500 osteoarthritic (OA) knees was used to assess the applicability of the CPAK classification. CPAK comprises nine phenotypes based on the arithmetic HKA (aHKA) that estimates constitutional limb alignment and joint line obliquity (JLO). Intraoperative balance was compared within each phenotype in a cohort of 138 computer-assisted TKAs randomized to KA or MA. Primary outcomes included descriptive analyses of healthy and OA groups per CPAK type, and comparison of balance at 10° of flexion within each type. Secondary outcomes assessed balance at 45° and 90° and bone recuts required to achieve final knee balance within each CPAK type.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 1 | Pages 117 - 124
1 Jan 2020
MacDessi SJ Griffiths-Jones W Chen DB Griffiths-Jones S Wood JA Diwan AD Harris IA

Aims

It is unknown whether kinematic alignment (KA) objectively improves knee balance in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), despite this being the biomechanical rationale for its use. This study aimed to determine whether restoring the constitutional alignment using a restrictive KA protocol resulted in better quantitative knee balance than mechanical alignment (MA).

Methods

We conducted a randomized superiority trial comparing patients undergoing TKA assigned to KA within a restrictive safe zone or MA. Optimal knee balance was defined as an intercompartmental pressure difference (ICPD) of 15 psi or less using a pressure sensor. The primary endpoint was the mean intraoperative ICPD at 10° of flexion prior to knee balancing. Secondary outcomes included balance at 45° and 90°, requirements for balancing procedures, and presence of tibiofemoral lift-off.