Does the proximal humeral bone quality influence alignment after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with short humeral stems?

PURPOSE

When compared to standard-length humeral stem in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), short humeral stems in RTSA require good proximal humeral metaphyseal bone quality to gain proper and secure fixation during prosthetic implantation. Shorter humeral stems potentially carry more risk of misalignment than standard or long humeral stems. The hypothesis was that misalignment of the short humeral stems is influenced by regional bone quality.

METHODS

RTSA with a short curved humeral stem with neck-shaft angle (NSA) default of 132.5° was reviewed. The study group included 35 cases at a mean age of 75.97 (± 6.23) years. Deltoid-tuberosity index (DTI) was measured to evaluate proximal humeral bone quality. The deltoid tuberosity index was measured at immediately above position of the upper end of the deltoid tuberosity. Stem alignment was given by the angle measured in degrees between the intramedullary humeral shaft axis and the axis of the humeral implant stem.

RESULTS

The patient's mean DTI was 1.37 ± 0.16 (median, 1.32; range, 1.12-1.80). 22 patients had poor bone quality (DTI < 1.4), compared to 13 patients with acceptable bone quality (DTI > 1.4). After RTSA, ten humeral components (29%) were neutrally aligned, whereas 25 humeral components (71%) were misaligned. There was no correlation between misalignment and DTI (r = 0.117; p = 0.504). But there was a strong correlation between misalignment and the patient's own NSA (r = - 0.47; p = 0.004). The postoperative stem position and stem misalignment are not associated with functional outcomes (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The misalignment of the short curved humeral stem frequently occurs. Poor reginal humeral bone quality does not influence misalignment after RTSA with a short humeral stem. Postoperative stem alignment is associated with the patient's preoperative NSA and method of neck cut. The misalignment does not affect functional outcomes for midterm follow-up. Further long-term follow-up studies are needed to confirm its clinical relevance.

No clinical advantage with customized individually made implants over conventional off-the-shelf implants in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be performed with either conventional off-the-shelf (OTS) or customized individually-made (CIM) implants. The evidence for CIM implants is limited and variable, and the aim of this review was to compare clinical and radiological outcomes between CIM and OTS implants.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Studies reporting on clinical, radiological, or alignment outcomes for CIM and OTS implants were selected. The studies were appraised using the Methodical index for non-randomized studies tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The studies comprised 2856 CIM and 1877 OTS TKAs. Revision rate was higher with CIM (5.9%) compared to OTS (3.7%) implants [OR 1.23(95% CI 0.69-2.18)]. Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) was higher in CIM (2.2%) compared to OTS (1.1%) group [OR 2.95(95% CI 0.95-9.13)] and complications rate was higher in CIM (5%) vs. OTS (4.5%) [OR 1.45(95% CI 0.53-3.96)] but neither reached statistical significance. Length of stay was significantly shorter in CIM group 2.9 days vs. 3.5 days [MD - 0.51(95% CI - 0.82 to - 0.20)]. Knee Society Score showed no difference between CIM and OTS groups for Knee 90.5 vs. 90.6 [MD - 0.27(95% CI - 4.27 to 3.73)] and Function 86.1 vs. 83.1 [MD 1.51(95% CI - 3.69 to 6.70)].

CONCLUSION

CIM implants in TKA have theoretical benefits over OTS prostheses. However, in this present review, CIM implants were associated with higher revisions, MUA, and overall complication rates. There was no difference in outcome score and CIM implants did not improve overall target alignment; however, more CIM TKAs were found to be in the HKA target zone compared to OTS TKAs. The findings of this review do not support the general utilization of CIM over OTS implants in TKA.

Knee kinematics are primarily determined by implant alignment but knee kinetics are mainly influenced by muscle coordination strategy

Implant malalignment has been reported to be a primary reason for revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In addition, altered muscle coordination patterns are commonly observed in TKA patients, which is thought to alter knee contact loads. A comprehensive understanding of the influence of surgical implantation and muscle recruitment strategies on joint contact mechanics is crucial to improve surgical techniques, increase implant longevity, and inform rehabilitation protocols. In this study, a detailed musculoskeletal model with a 12 degrees of freedom knee was developed to represent a TKA subject from the CAMS-Knee datasets. Using motion capture and ground reaction force data, a level walking cycle was simulated and the joint movement and loading patterns were estimated using a novel technique for concurrent optimization of muscle activations and joint kinematics. In addition, over 12'000 Monte Carlo simulations were performed to predict knee contact mechanics during walking, considering numerous combinations of implant alignment and muscle activation scenarios. Validation of our baseline simulation showed good agreement between the model kinematics and loading patterns against the in vivo data. Our analyses reveal a considerable impact of implant alignment on the joint kinematics, while variation in muscle activation strategies mainly affects knee contact loading. Moreover, our results indicate that high knee compressive forces do not necessarily originate from extreme kinematics and vice versa. This study provides an improved understanding of the complex inter-relationships between loading and movement patterns resulting from different surgical implantation and muscle coordination strategies and presents a validated framework towards population-based modelling in TKA.

[Future implications of navigation in total knee arthroplasty]

BACKGROUND

After more than two decades of experience with computer-assisted knee arthroplasty, extensive experience and study data are available, allowing a profound evaluation. Undoubtedly, computer-assisted knee arthroplasty has been proven to achieve excellent results for implant positioning and long-leg axis reconstruction. Thus, computer-assisted knee arthroplasty represents the current gold standard to avoid unintended malpositioning of total knee components for neutrally aligned implants and individualized implant alignment (kinematic alignment, adjusted mechanical alignment, and others). Previous studies could not show significant differences in functional outcomes and patient satisfaction. However, recent meta-analyses showed relevant advantages of computer-assisted knee arthroplasty. These results could be based on further developments in software-assisted soft tissue balancing and more sensitive evaluation methods of follow-up examinations.

LONG-TERM OUTCOME

Further, international registries show advantages of computer-assisted knee arthroplasty regarding long-term outcomes. In particular, the Australian arthroplasty registry describes a significantly lower revision rate due to aseptic loosening/osteolysis in the computer-assisted knee arthroplasty group, analyzing a period of up to 17 years. These positive effects can already be proven six months following surgery.

FUTURE PROSPECTS

However, despite demonstrated benefits, computer-assisted knee arthroplasty has not yet become established in daily routine, and wide regional variations in its use are observed. Newer developments such as robotic-assisted knee arthroplasty, primarily based on navigation techniques, are currently being heavily promoted. However, this new technology must justify its enormous additional costs and prove its advantages compared to computer-assisted knee arthroplasty. In the backdrop of the development of computer-assisted knee arthroplasty, this might be a difficult task.

Associations between implant alignment or position and patient-reported outcomes after total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate the associations between implant alignment/position and patient-reported outcomes following total hip arthroplasty using CT-based simulation software.

METHODS

We reviewed hips of 137 patients (27 males, 110 females, mean age: 67.3 years old) who underwent total hip arthroplasty. Radiographic evaluations were based on the software for evaluation of the parameters related to implant alignment/position and femoral/3-dimensional offset using post-operative CT data. Pre-operative and one-year post-operative patient-reported outcomes using Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire scores were evaluated.

FINDINGS

The total and movement scores of normal combined anteversion and stem anteversion angle groups were significantly higher than those of lower and higher groups. The pain and movement scores of decreased femoral offset group were significantly lower than those of restored and increased femoral offset group. There were no significant differences in all scores in cup inclination and anteversion angle, stem coronal alignment, and 3-dimensional femoral offset among groups. Moreover, investigation of the associations between combined anteversion angle/stem anteversion/femoral offset and movement scores revealed that combined anteversion angle and stem anteversion were significantly associated with the movement that needs deep hip flexion and occasionally deep abduction, and high femoral offset was also associated with the movement that needs deep hip flexion.

INTERPRETATION

Surgeons should consider the stem anteversion, stem sagittal alignment, and combined anteversion, in addition to the femoral offset to achieve patient's post-operative satisfaction, although the surgeon may have a relatively larger choice for the implant positioning, especially on the cup side.

Clinical impact of component placement in manually instrumented total knee arthroplasty : a systematic review

AIMS

The goal of the current systematic review was to assess the impact of implant placement accuracy on outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using the Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science databases in order to assess the impact of the patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) and implant placement accuracy on outcomes following TKA. Studies assessing the impact of implant alignment, rotation, size, overhang, or condylar offset were included. Study quality was assessed, evidence was graded (one-star: no evidence, two-star: limited evidence, three-star: moderate evidence, four-star: strong evidence), and recommendations were made based on the available evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 49 studies were identified for inclusion. With respect to PROMs, there was two-star evidence in support of mechanical axis alignment (MAA), femorotibial angle (FTA), femoral coronal angle (FCA), tibial coronal angle (TCA), femoral sagittal angle (FSA), femoral rotation, tibial and combined rotation/mismatch, and implant size/overhang or offset on PROMs, and one-star evidence in support of tibial sagittal angle (TSA), impacting PROMs. With respect to survival, there was three- to four-star evidence in support FTA, FCA, TCA, and TSA, moderate evidence in support of femoral rotation, tibial and combined rotation/mismatch, and limited evidence in support of MAA, FSA, and implant size/overhang or offset impacting survival.

CONCLUSION

Overall, there is limited evidence to suggest that PROMs are impacted by the accuracy of implant placement, and malalignment does not appear to be a significant driver of the observed high rates of patient dissatisfaction following TKA. However, FTA, FCA, TCA, TSA, and implant rotation demonstrate a moderate-strong relationship with implant survival. Efforts should be made to improve the accuracy of these parameters in order to improve TKA survival. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(9):1449-1456.

Impact of alignment and kinematic variation on resistive moment and dislocation propensity for THA with lipped and neutral liners

Instability and dislocation remain leading indications for revision of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Many studies have addressed the links between implant design and dislocation; however, an understanding of the impact of alignment and kinematic variability on constraint of modern THA constructs to provide joint stability is needed. The objective of this study is to provide objective data to be considered in the treatment algorithm to protect against joint instability. Joint contact and muscle forces were evaluated using musculoskeletal models of THA patients performing activities consistent with posterior and anterior dislocation. Position and joint loads were transferred to a finite element simulation with an experimentally calibrated hip capsule representation, where they were kinematically extrapolated until impingement and eventual dislocation. Cup anteversion and inclination were varied according to clinical measurements, and variation in imposed kinematics was included. The resistive moment provided by the contact force and joint capsule, and overall dislocation rate (dislocations/total simulations) were determined with neutral and lipped acetabular liners. Use of a lipped liner did increase the resistive moment in posterior dislocation, by an average of 5.2 Nm, and the flexion angle at dislocation by 1.4° compared to a neutral liner. There was a reduction in similar magnitude in resistance to anterior dislocation. Increased cup anteversion and inclination, hip abduction and internal rotation all reduced the occurrence of posterior dislocation but increased anterior dislocation. A quantitative understanding of tradeoffs in the dislocation risk inherent to THA construct options is valuable in supporting surgical decision making.

Robots in the Operating Room During Hip and Knee Arthroplasty

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

The utilization of technology has increased over the last decade across all surgical specialties. Robotic-assisted surgery, among the most advanced surgical technology, applied to hip and knee arthroplasty has experienced rapid growth in utilization, surgical applications, and robotic platforms. The goal of this study is to provide a comprehensive review of the most commonly utilized robotic platforms for hip and knee arthroplasty and the most up to date literature on the benefits and limitations of robotic arthroplasty.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies consistently demonstrate that that robotic-assisted surgery during total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) improves component position and alignment. There is also growing evidence that robotic-assisted UKA improves clinical outcomes and implant survivorship and, therefore, may be cost-effective. However, there remains to be convincing evidence that robotic-assisted arthroplasty improves clinical outcome measures or reduces revision rates for THA and TKA. Potential disadvantages of robotic arthroplasty remain, including a learning curve, potential for additional radiation exposure preoperatively, and the financial costs. Robotic hip and knee arthroplasty remains attactive as studies show that it consistently improves implant position and alignment over conventional techniques. There is growing evidence that robotic UKA may improve patient outcomes and reduce revision rates, but further study is needed. In addition, further and longer-term studies are needed to determine if improved component position and alignment in TKA and THA leads to improved clinical outcomes and reduced revision rates.

Direct anterior approach in lateral position achieves superior cup orientation in total hip arthroplasty: a radiological comparative study of two consecutive series

INTRODUCTION

Although the advantages of total hip arthroplasty (THA) using the direct anterior approach (DAA) have been well documented, DAA in the supine position is limited by the difficulty in exposing the acetabulum and femur, which may result in implant malpositioning and intra-operative complications. Recent studies have reported that DAA-THA in the lateral position can achieve satisfactory clinical and radiographic outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the difference in implant alignment between two patient cohorts that underwent primary THA by DAA and the traditional posterolateral approach (PLA) in the lateral position.

METHODS

A total of 208 THAs (110 using DAA and 98 using PLA) were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

The cup anteversion angle was closer to the target anteversion angle, and the accuracy of cup orientation was superior in the DAA group. A total of 82 (74.5%) DAA-THA and 56 (57.1%) PLA-THA cases showed successful inclination and anteversion angles (p = 0.008) of the implant. In addition, 90 (81.8%) DAA-THA and 67 (68.4%) PLA-THA cases had successful anteversion angle (p = 0.024). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of successful inclination angle (98 vs. 81, p = 0.181), as well as in the stem alignment in both coronal and sagittal planes.

CONCLUSION

THA using DAA in the lateral position can achieve superior cup orientation compared to PLA while maintaining the stem alignment.

Effect of improved navigation performance on the accuracy of implant placement in total hip arthroplasty with a CT-based navigation system

A computed tomography (CT)-based navigation system is one of the support tools to place implant with appropriate alignment and position in total hip arthroplasty (THA). To determine whether the higher performance of the navigation would further improve the accuracy of implant placement in the clinical setting, we retrospectively compared the navigation accuracy of two different versions of a navigation system. The newer version of the navigation system had an upgraded optical sensor with superior positional accuracy. Navigation accuracy, defined as differences between postoperative measurements on CT images and intraoperative records on the navigation system, of 49 THAs performed with the newer version of the navigation system was compared with that of 49 THAs performed with the older version. With the newer version, the mean absolute accuracy (95% limits of agreement) of implant alignment was 1.2° (± 3.3°) for cup inclination, 1.0° (± 2.4°) for cup anteversion, 2.0° (± 4.9°) for stem anteversion, and 1.1° (± 2.4°) for stem valgus angle. The accuracy of the implant position was 1.5 mm (± 3.1 mm), 1.3 mm (± 3.0 mm), and 1.5 mm (± 3.1 mm) for cup x-, y-, and z-axes, respectively, 1.6 mm (± 3.2 mm), 1.4 mm (± 2.9 mm), and 1.5 mm (± 2.7 mm) for stem x-, y-, and z-axes, respectively, and 2.4 mm (± 4.5 mm) for leg length discrepancy. The values for the newer version were significantly more accurate with less variation compared to those of the older version. With upgraded navigation performance, more accurate implant placement was demonstrated in the clinical setting.

The impact of hip implant alignment on muscle and joint loading during dynamic activities

BACKGROUND

Component alignment is an important consideration in total hip arthroplasty. The impact of changes in alignment on muscle forces and joint contact forces during dynamic tasks are not well understood, and have the potential to influence surgical decision making. The objectives of this study were to assess the impact of femoral head/stem and cup component placement on hip muscle and joint contact forces during tasks of daily living and to identify which alignment parameters have the greatest impact on joint loading.

METHODS

Using a series of strength-calibrated, subject-specific musculoskeletal models of patients performing gait, sit-to-stand and step down tasks, component alignments were perturbed and joint contact and muscle forces evaluated.

FINDINGS

Based on the range of alignments reported clinically, variation in head/stem anteversion-retroversion had the largest impact of any degree of freedom throughout all three tasks; average contact forces 413.5 (319.1) N during gait, 262.7 (256.4) N during sit to stand, and 572.7 (228.1) N during the step down task. The sensitivity of contact force to anteversion-retroversion of the head/stem was 31.5 N/° for gait, which was similar in magnitude to anterior-posterior position of the cup (34.6 N/m for gait). Additionally, superior-inferior cup alignment resulted in 16.4 (4.9)° of variation in the direction of the hip joint contact force across the three tasks, with the most inferior cup placements moving the force vector towards the cup equator at the point of peak joint contact force.

INTERPRETATION

A quantitative understanding of the impact and potential tradeoffs when altering component alignment is valuable in supporting surgical decision making.

Conventional versus computer-navigated TKA: a prospective randomized study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess the midterm results of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) implanted with a specific computer navigation system in a group of patients (NAV) and to assess the same prosthesis implanted with the conventional technique in another group (CON); we hypothesized that computer navigation surgery would improve implant alignment, functional scores and survival of the implant compared to the conventional technique.

METHODS

From 2008 to 2009, 225 patients were enrolled in the study and randomly assigned in CON and NAV groups; 240 consecutive mobile-bearing ultra-congruent score (Amplitude, Valence, France) TKAs were performed by a single surgeon, 117 using the conventional method and 123 using the computer-navigated approach. Clinical outcome assessment was based on the Knee Society Score (KSS), the Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Score and the Western Ontario Mac Master University Index score. Component survival was calculated by Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 6.4 years (range 6-7 years). Two patients were lost to follow-up. No differences were seen between the two groups in age, sex, BMI and side of implantation. Three patients of CON group referred feelings of instability during walking, but clinical tests were all negative. NAV group showed statistical significant better KSS Score and wider ROM and fewer outliers from neutral mechanical axis, lateral distal femoral angle, medial proximal tibial angle and tibial slope in post-operative radiographic assessment. There was one case of early post-operative superficial infection (caused by Staph. Aureus) successfully treated with antibiotics. No mechanical loosening, mobile-bearing dislocation or patellofemoral complication was seen. At 7 years of follow-up, component survival in relation to the risk of aseptic loosening or other complications was 100 %. There were no implant revisions.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates superior accuracy in implant positioning and statistical significant better functional outcomes of computer-navigated TKA. Computer navigation for TKAs should be used routinely in primary implants.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Posterior tibial slope accuracy with patient-specific cutting guides during total knee arthroplasty: A preliminary study of 50 cases

BACKGROUND

Patient-specific cutting guides were recently introduced to facilitate total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Their accuracy in achieving optimal implant alignment remains controversial. The objective of this study was to evaluate postoperative radiographic outcomes of 50 TKA procedures with special attention to posterior tibial slope (PTS), which is difficult to control intraoperatively. We hypothesized that patient-specific cutting guides failed to consistently produce the planned PTS.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The Signature™ patient-specific cutting guides (Biomet) developed from magnetic resonance imaging data were used in a prospective case-series of 50 TKAs. The target PTS was 2°. Standardised digitised radiographs were obtained postoperatively and evaluated by an independent reader. Reproducibility of the radiographic measurements was assessed on 20 cases. The posterior cortical line of the proximal tibia was chosen as the reference for PTS measurement. Inaccuracy was defined as an at least 2° difference in either direction compared to the target.

RESULTS

The implant PTS was within 2° of the target in 72% of knees. In the remaining 28%, PTS was either excessive (n=10; maximum, 9°) or reversed (n=4; maximum, -6°). The postoperative hip-knee-ankle angle was 0° ± 3° in 88% of knees, and the greatest deviation was 9° of varus.

CONCLUSION

These findings support our hypothesis that patient-specific instrumentation decreases PTS accuracy. They are consistent with recently published data. In contrast, patient-specific instrumentation provided accurate alignment in the coronal plane.