Long leg radiographs underestimate the degree of constitutional varus limb alignment and joint line obliquity in comparison with computed tomography: a radiographic study

CPAK classification detect the real knee joint apex position in less than half of the knees

PURPOSE

Accurate assessment of the knee joint line is essential for surgeries involving the knee. The knee joint line obliquity (KJLO) is a radiological measurement that evaluates the position of the knee joint relative to the ground and is frequently used in preoperative planning and clinical follow-up. On the other hand, coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) classifications assesses the joint line as the summation of the medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) and mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA). The purpose of this study is to determine the concordance of these two measurement techniques.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study evaluated the long-leg standing radiographs (LSRs) of 164 healthy knees. The extremity KJLO and CPAK classification JLO were measured twice by two observers at 8-week intervals. The knee joint line apex positions (proximal, neutral and distal) of the two measurement techniques are compared (concordance or discordant). The intraobserver and interobserver reliability were examined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Possible causes of the discordant were evaluated with univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

CPAK classification detected the KJLO apex position in 70 extremities (42.7%) only. Subgroups CPAK JLO detected 13.6% of the proximal apex, 20.4% of the neutral, and 90.7% of the distal apex (p < 0.01). Upon multivariate logistic regression analysis, the variable KJLO apex position (proximal, neutral vs. distal, odds ratio (OR) = 10.291, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.225-25.656, and (p < 0.01) was determined as a risk factor for discordant.

CONCLUSION

The CPAK JLO measurement technique can be misleading in defining the KJLO apex position and the concordance between them is less than 50%. It has a high tendency to misleadingly predict proximal and neutral apex positions, which can potentially have negative implications for assessing the joint line.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Caliper-verified unrestricted kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty in Asian patients showed efficacious mid- to long-term results regardless of postoperative alignment categories

PURPOSE

There have been insufficient data regarding the long-term results of unrestricted kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty (unKATKA) in Asian patients. We investigated mid- to long-term clinical and radiological follow-up data of Korean patients after caliper-verified unKATKA of minimum 7.4-10 years including categorised data of postoperative tibial component, limb and knee alignment. Additionally, we analysed the preoperative distribution and postoperative restoration of coronal plane alignment of knee (CPAK) phenotypes.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of 63 patients: 96 osteoarthritic underwent consecutive caliper-verified unKATKA between October 2013 and May 2016 by a single surgeon. Implant survivorship was investigated for revision for any reason. Each knee was categorised into an in-range or outlier group by three postoperative alignment parameters: tibial component, knee and limb alignment. Statistical analyses were done for any significant differences in clinical scores and implant survival rates between groups. Finally, all knees were classified into CPAK classification postoperatively and postoperatively. The CPAK restoration rate was calculated.

RESULTS

Among 85 knees in the clinically confirmed group, implant survival was 98.8%. There was one case of revision due to periprosthetic fracture. The percentage postoperatively aligned in the varus (valgus) outlier range was 100% (0%) for tibial component, 16.7% (24.8%) for the knee alignment and 51% (0%) for the limb alignment. All three categories did not affect implant survival or clinical scores. Eighty one out of 96 knees (84.4%) were restored to their CPAK phenotype postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

With the limitation of a case series having a small number of patients and gender deviation, our study suggests that caliper-verified unKATKA could be a good option regardless of geographical variation of constitutional alignment in patients with osteoarthritis (OA).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Imageless robotic total knee arthroplasty determines similar coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) parameters to long leg radiographs

BACKGROUND

The coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) classification was first developed using long leg radiographs (LLR) and has since been reported using image-based and imageless robotic total knee arthroplasty (TKA) systems. However, the correspondence between imageless robotics and LLR-derived CPAK parameters has yet to be investigated. This study therefore examined the differences in CPAK parameters determined with LLR and imageless robotic navigation using either generic or optimized cartilage wear assumptions.

METHODS

Medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) and lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA) were determined from the intraoperative registration data of 61 imageless robotic TKAs using either a generic 2 mm literature-based wear assumption (Navlit) or an optimized wear assumption (Navopt) found using an error minimization algorithm. MPTA and LDFA were also measured from preoperative LLR by two observers and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated. MPTA, LDFA, joint line obliquity (JLO), and arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA) were compared between the robotic and the average LLR measurements over the two observers.

RESULTS

ICCs between observers for LLR were over 0.95 for MPTA, LDFA, JLO, and aHKA, indicating excellent agreement. Mean CPAK differences were not significant between LLR and Navlit (all differences within 0.6°, P > 0.1) or Navopt (all within 0.1°, P > 0.83). Mean absolute errors (MAE) between LLR and Navlit were: LDFA = 1.4°, MPTA = 2.0°, JLO = 2.1°, and aHKA = 2.7°. Compared to LLR, the generic wear classified 88% and the optimized wear classified 94% of knees within one CPAK group. Bland-Altman comparisons reported good agreement for LLR vs. Navlit and Navopt, with > 95% and > 91.8% of measurements within the limits of agreement across all CPAK parameters, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Imageless robotic navigation data can be used to calculate CPAK parameters for arthritic knees undergoing TKA with good agreement to LLR. Generic wear assumptions determined MPTA and LDFA with MAE within 2° and optimizing wear assumptions showed negligible improvement.

Large multiplanar changes to native alignment have no apparent impact on clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

This study sought to examine if achieved postoperative alignment when compared to the native anatomy would lead to a difference in Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), and whether the achieved alignment could be broadly categorised by an accepted alignment strategy.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data on patients undergoing single primary or bilateral simultaneous total knee arthroplasty (TKA) was carried out. CT scans were used to determine the mean change ("delta values") between the pre and postoperative; hip-knee-ankle angle, lateral distal femoral angle, medial proximal tibial angle and femoral implant rotation. Femoral implant flexion and tibial implant slope were measured postoperatively. The primary outcome was the relationship of the variables to the change in KOOS pain subscale after one year. The secondary outcome was the number of knees which could be categorised postoperatively to an alignment strategy, and the mean PROMs in each cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 296 knees in 261 patients were available for analysis. With regards to the primary outcome, the delta values for each variable did not demonstrate any association with the change in knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) pain score. Approximately 46% of knees could not be categorised to an alignment strategy based on postoperatively measured alignment, with no significant difference between each cohort with regards to the change in KOOS Pain score.

CONCLUSION

Achieved alignment does not consistently match accepted alignment strategies, and appears to confer no benefit to clinical outcomes when the native anatomy is most closely approximated, nor results in poorer outcomes in outliers. This study highlights the importance of routine three dimensional pre and postoperative imaging in clinical practice and for the valid analysis of outcomes in studies on alignment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective cohort study.