Slight femoral under-correction versus neutral alignment in total knee arthroplasty with preoperative varus knees: a comparative study

Background This study aimed to compare the short-term clinical results of slight femoral under-correction with neutral alignment in patients with preoperative varus knees who underwent total knee arthroplasty. Methods The medical records and imaging data were retrospectively collected from patients who had undergone total knee arthroplasty in our hospital from January 2016 to June 2019. All patients had varus knees preoperatively. Upon 1:1 propensity score matching, 256 patients (256 knees) were chosen and divided into a neutral alignment group (n=128) and an under-correction group (n=128). The patients in the neutral group were treated with the neutral alignment. In the under-correction group, the femoral mechanical axis had a 2° under-correction. The operative time, tourniquet time and the length of hospital stay in the two groups were recorded. The postoperative hip-knee-ankle angle, frontal femoral component angle and frontal tibial component angle were measured. Patient-reported outcome measures were also compared. Results The operative time, tourniquet time and the length of hospital stay in the under-correction group were significantly shorter than the neutral alignment group (P<0.05). At the 2-year follow-up, the under-correction group had a larger varus alignment (P<0.05) and a larger frontal femoral component angle (P<0.05), and the frontal tibial component angles of the two groups were comparable. Compared with the neutral alignment group, the slight femoral under-correction group had significantly better patient-reported outcome measures scores (P<0.05). Conclusion For varus knees treated with total knee arthroplasty, alignment with a slight femoral under-correction has advantages over the neutral alignment in terms of the shorter operative time and better short-term clinical results. Level of evidence III

Be Prepared: Preoperative Coronal Malalignment Often Leads to More Extensive Surgery Than Sagittal Malalignment During Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery

Objective: To evaluate the effect of coronal alignment on: (1) surgical invasiveness and operative complexity and (2) postoperative complications.Methods: A retrospective, cohort study of adult spinal deformity patients was conducted. Alignment groups were: (1) neutral alignment (NA): coronal vertical axis (CVA) ≤ 3 cm and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) ≤ 5 cm; (2) coronal malalignment (CM) only: CVA > 3 cm; (3) Sagittal malalignment (SM) only: SVA > 5 cm; and (4) coronal and sagittal malalignment (CCSM): CVA > 3 cm and SVA > 5 cm.Results: Of 243 patients, alignment groups were: NA 115 (47.3%), CM 48 (19.8%), SM 38 (15.6%), and CCSM 42 (17.3%). Total instrumented levels (TILs) were highest in CM (14.5 ± 3.7) and CCSM groups (14 ± 4.0) (p < 0.001). More 3-column osteotomies (3COs) were performed in SM (21.1%) and CCSM (28.9%) groups than CM (10.4%) (p = 0.003). CM patients had more levels instrumented (p = 0.029), posterior column osteotomies (PCOs) (p < 0.001), and TLIFs (p = 0.002) than SM patients. CCSM patients had more TLIFs (p = 0.012) and higher estimated blood loss (EBL) (p = 0.003) than SM patients. CVA displayed a stronger relationship with TIL (p = 0.002), EBL (p < 0.001), and operative time (p < 0.001) than SVA, which had only one significant association with EBL (p = 0.010). Both SM/CCSM patients had higher readmissions (p = 0.003) and reoperations (p < 0.001) than CM patients.Conclusion: Amount of preoperative CM was a better predictor of surgical invasiveness than the amount of SM, despite 3COs more commonly performed in SM patients. CM patients had more instrumented levels, PCOs, and TLIFs than SM patients.

Pelvic Obliquity, It Is Not a Neutral Angle in the Normal Population

Introduction: The definition of pelvic obliquity angle (PO) still unclear in the normal population. Several factors might cause the obliquity i.e. hip osteoarthritis, developmental dysplasia of hip, trauma, scoliosis and spine related factors. Perhaps, pelvic obliquity is expressed as a deviation of neutral alignment in the normal population. We developed present study to evaluate the distribution of pelvic obliquity angle in normal population.Method: present study retrospectively enrolled on 134 cases (70 female and 64 male) without any problem of spine, pelvic and lower extremity abnormality who referred to our institution from January 2017 to January 2018 for non-orthopedic problems. We retrospectively reviewed radiographs from institutional PACS and measured pelvic obliquity angle using mediCAD Classic software (version 3.50.0.1, Hectec, Landstuhl, Germany). Finally, all data were analyzed with SPSS software (version 24.0, USA).Result: present study show that all data has significant relationship in one sample T test. All PO angles were normally distributed in kurtosis and skewness test. The patients were aged with a mean of 39.6 ±16.8 in current study. The mean of PO angle was 2.18 ±1.6 in all patients and 0.13 standard error of mean. There was no significant differences between male and female genders (2.07 ±1.6 vs 2.27±1.6, P=0.47). This study reveal that age and PO angle had not any correlation (P=0.165).Conclusion: despite this fact, there was an attitude that PO angle normally is in neutral alignment, our result uncover that the normal range of PO angle was not neutral and ranged from 0.58 to 4.4 degrees with one standard deviation from mean in the normal population.

Short-Term Outcomes after High Tibial Osteotomy Aimed at Neutral Alignment Combined with Arthroscopic Centralization of Medial Meniscus in Osteoarthritis Patients

The study aimed to improve the long-term outcomes of open-wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO); procedures combining OWHTO aimed at neutral alignment and arthroscopic centralization for meniscal extrusion have been introduced. The present study evaluated short-term patient-reported outcome measures; namely, the patient subjective satisfaction scores and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for walking pain after OWHTO aimed at neutral alignment with and without arthroscopic centralization for an extruded medial meniscus. A retrospective review of 50 primary OWHTO patients was conducted. Thirty-nine patients were included in the analysis after applying the exclusion criteria. The centralization group included 21 patients with knee osteoarthritis patients who underwent the OWHTO with arthroscopic meniscal centralization, while the control group included 18 patients who underwent OWHTO alone. The patient subjective satisfaction scores and NRS for walking pain were recorded at outpatient visits from before surgery to 3 years after surgery. In terms of the Lysholm knee scale, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score, and Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, the latest data (at least 2 years after surgery) were reviewed. Radiographic changes in joint space width and joint line congruence angle were measured 2 years postoperatively. Patient demographic data were also reviewed. One patient in the centralization group experienced a superficial surgical site infection. The patient subjective satisfaction and NRS scores for walking pain gradually improved by 1 year after surgery and were sustained until 3 years after surgery in both groups, with no significant difference between the groups. The course of patient-reported outcome measures from before surgery to 3 years after surgery for solely OWHTO aimed at neutral alignment and OWHTO aimed at neutral alignment with arthroscopic centralization showed the similar trends.

Mild to Moderate Varus Alignment in Relation to Surgical Repair of a Medial Meniscus Root Tear: A Matched-Cohort Controlled Study With 2 Years of Follow-up

Background: Increased varus alignment of the lower extremity is known to be a poor prognostic factor for the surgical repair for a medial meniscus root tear (MMRT). However, given the concept of constitutional varus, which is present in a substantial portion of the normal population, the generally accepted surgical indication for MMRT concerning a varus alignment of 5° may be unnecessarily narrow. Purpose: To compare the surgical outcomes of arthroscopic transtibial pullout repair of MMRT according to the degree of varus alignment of the lower extremity. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3 Methods: Patients who underwent isolated arthroscopic transtibial pullout repair of MMRT between January 2010 and July 2017 at one institution and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years were included in this study. Patients were classified into 1 of 2 groups: the experimental group (n = 22) included patients with a preoperative hip-knee-ankle angle between 5° and 10° varus (mild to moderate varus alignment) and the control group (n = 51) included those with a preoperative hip-knee-ankle angle <5° varus (neutral alignment). Clinical scores and radiographic parameters were compared between the groups to assess surgical outcomes, which were statistically matched for potential confounders (age, body mass index, the severity of cartilage lesion) by use of the inverse probability of treatment weighting. A noninferiority trial was performed comparing the experimental and control groups in terms of subjective outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee subjective and Lysholm scores) and objective outcomes (postoperative medial meniscal extrusion and the rate of osteoarthritis progression). Results: There were no statistically significant differences in surgical outcomes between the groups in subjective and objective aspects, which were consistent before and after inverse probability of treatment weighting. Apart from the clinical improvement observed in both groups, overall degenerative changes in the knee were found, although progression rates did not differ between the groups. In terms of the noninferiority trial, the overall surgical outcomes in the experimental group were not inferior to those in the control group. Conclusion: The short-term surgical outcomes of arthroscopic transtibial pullout repair for MMRT of patients with mild to moderate varus alignment were not inferior to but rather comparable with those with neutral alignment in terms of subjective and objective aspects. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to exclude patients with a diagnosis of MMRT from being indicated for the surgery simply because of mild to moderate varus alignment.

Total Ankle Arthroplasty With Valgus Deformity

Background: A substantial coronal plane deformity is common in the context of end-stage ankle osteoarthritis. Recent literature shows a trend toward extending the indication of total ankle arthroplasty in increasingly severe coronal deformities, showing promising results when correct alignment is achieved. Nevertheless, the results of lateral transfibular total ankle replacement (LTTAR) in valgus has not been extensively studied. We aimed to evaluate if the outcomes of LTTAR in ankles with valgus deformity were similar to those with no major deformity at short-term follow-up. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 228 LTTARs. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to the preoperative coronal plane tibiotalar angle (TTS): neutral (less than 10 degrees of coronal deformity, 209 patients) and valgus (above 10 degrees of valgus, 19 patients). Clinical evaluation was performed using the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, visual analog scale (VAS), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey 12 (SF-12) regarding its Physical and Mental Component Summary items. The radiographic evaluation considered anteroposterior and lateral ankle radiographs. Complications were also registered and classified as major or minor. The minimum follow-up was 2 years. Results: The average AOFAS, VAS, and SF-12 scores improved significantly postoperatively ( P < .001), without differences between groups. At final radiographic follow-up, the valgus alignment group did not show significant differences with the neutral alignment group regarding TTS, lateral distal tibial angle, or anterior distal tibial angle ( P > .05). Conclusion: LTTAR in cases with valgus deformity achieved and maintained correction at short-term follow-up, as obtained in neutral alignment ankles. Clinical outcomes improved significantly regardless of preoperative valgus deformity. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Degree of Coronal Alignment Correction Can’t Predict Knee Function in Total Knee Replacement

Background: Whether neutral alignment brings better clinical outcomes is controversial. Consideration of the preoperative knee condition of patients and some limitations of previous studies, we suggested that other index may be more important than a generic target of 0° ± 3° of a neutral axis to reflect changes in coronal alignment after total knee replacement (TKR). The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between alignment and functional outcome with a new grouping method and the concept of correction rate. Methods: The study included 358 knees, the mean follow-up period was 3.62 years. A new grouping method was adopted to divide patients into three groups based on the degree of correction of mechanical femoral – tibial angle (MFTA): under-correction (n = 128), neutral (n = 209) and over-correction (n = 21). Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score were compared among the 3 groups. In addition, we also attempt to further explore whether the concept of correction rate can predict postoperative functional score. Results: HSS score showed significant improvement in all groups. There was no difference in HSS score (88.27 vs 88 vs 85.62)or incremental scores (26.23 vs 25.22 vs 22.88) based on the postoperative alignment category for the degree of correction of MFTA at the last follow-up. The correlational analyses also didn’t show any positive results.Conclusion: TKR is a soft tissue procedure and clinical outcome depends on many factors, only reaching neutral alignment after surgery may not mean a good clinical result. Therefore, categorization of optimal coronal alignment after TKR may be impractical. But we still believe that the concept of correction rate and new grouping method are worthy of research which can reflects the preoperative knee condition and the change of coronal alignment. Perhaps it can be better used in TKR in the future. Level of evidence: III.

Assessing the Role of Minimal Medial Tissue Release during Navigation-Assisted Varus Total Knee Arthroplasty Based on the Degree of Preoperative Varus Deformity

We assessed the impact of a minimal medial soft-tissue release with complete peripheral osteophyte removal on the ability to attain manual preresection deformity correction during navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for varus osteoarthritis. We included 131 TKAs for 109 patients with medial compartment predominant osteoarthritis. The steps for achieving minimal medial soft-tissue release were performed as follows: (1) elevation of a periosteal sleeve to 5-mm distal to the joint line and (2) complete removal of peripheral osteophytes. The evaluation criteria of this study were as follows: (1) age, (2) height, (3) weight, (4) body mass index (BMI), (5) sex, (6) the preoperative femorotibial mechanical angle in the neutral position before medial release and (7) the mechanical angle in maximum manual valgus stress after the two-step medial-release procedure (measured on the navigation screens). Multiple regression analysis of the criteria was performed to determine the degree of varus deformity that allowed neutral alignment but required extensive medial release. The femorotibial mechanical angle in the neutral position before medial release and sex correlated with the mechanical angle in maximum manual valgus stress on the navigation screen after medial release (r = 0.72, p < 0.001). Based on the regression formula, the maximum degree of preoperative varus deformity that allowed neutral alignment by the minimum medial-release procedure was 5.3 degrees for males and 9.1 degrees for females. The magnitude of deformity which has an impact on the ability to correct varus deformity (by minimal soft-tissue release and complete osteophyte removal) was clarified. If the preoperative degree of varus deformity was within 5.3 degrees for males and 9.1 degrees for females, an extensive medial release was not required to obtain neutral alignment.

Personalized alignment in total knee arthroplasty: current concepts

Traditionally in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), a post-operative neutral alignment was the gold standard. This principle has been contested as functional outcomes were found to be inconsistent. Analysis of limb alignment in the non-osteoarthritic population reveals variations from neutral alignment and consideration of a personalized or patient-specific alignment in TKA is challenging previous concepts. The aim of this review was to clarify the variations of current personalized alignments and to report their results. Current personalized approaches of alignment reported are: kinematic, inverse kinematic, restricted kinematic, and functional. The principle of “kinematic alignment” is knee resurfacing with restitution of pre-arthritic anatomy. The aim is to resurface the femur maintaining the native femoral joint line obliquity. The flexion and extension gaps are balanced with the tibial resection. The principle of the “inverse kinematic alignment” is to resurface the tibia with similar medial and lateral bone resections in order to keep the native tibial joint line obliquity. Gap balancing is performed by adjusting the femoral resections. To avoid reproducing extreme anatomical alignments there is “restricted kinematic alignment” which is a compromise between mechanical alignment and true kinematic alignment with a defined safe zone of alignment. Finally, there is the concept of “functional alignment” which is an evolution of kinematic alignment as enabling technology has progressed. This is obtained by manipulating alignment, bone resections, soft tissue releases, and/or implant positioning with a robotic-assisted system to optimize TKA function for a patient’s specific alignment, bone morphology, and soft tissue envelope. The aim of personalizing alignment is to restore native knee kinematics and improve functional outcomes after TKA. A long-term follow-up remains crucial to assess both outcomes and implant survivorship of these current concepts.