Bono Olivia J, Olcott Christopher W, Carangelo Robert, Jamison James P, Tigges Russell G, Talmo Carl T, Bono James V
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, New England Baptist Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
J Knee Surg. 2020 Jan;33(1):12-14. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1676070. Epub 2018 Dec 13.
While femoral intramedullary alignment has been found to be the most accurate and reproducible method for proper femoral component orientation in total knee arthroplasty, certain situations preclude the use of intramedullary alignment, such as ipsilateral long-stem total hip arthroplasty, femoral shaft deformity (congenital or post-traumatic), capacious femoral canal, and retained hardware. These cases require alternative alignment guides, that is, extramedullary alignment. The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of intramedullary alignment in reproducing the femoral anatomic axis. Using 35 adult cadaveric femora without obvious clinical deformity, and 7 with proximal prosthetic devices blocking the passage of an intramedullary guide, the accuracy of the guide rod was assessed both anatomically and radiographically. In the seven femora with proximal femoral devices, the guide rod could not be completely seated, resulting in a greater degree of flexion of the guide rod compared with the mechanical axis of the femur, and a greater degree of varus compared with the anatomical axis, as compared with 35 femora without obvious deformity. In cases where seating of the intramedullary guide rod is either incomplete or impossible, extramedullary femoral guides allow more accurate determination of the distal femoral cut by referencing directly from the mechanical axis, that is, the center of the femoral head. We present case studies as examples of indications for use of an extramedullary femoral guide. In addition, we demonstrate two different techniques for extramedullary femoral alignment using fluoroscopic guidance in cases incompatible with intramedullary alignment.
虽然在全膝关节置换术中,股骨髓内对线已被发现是使股骨假体组件正确定向的最准确且可重复的方法,但某些情况会妨碍使用髓内对线,例如同侧长柄全髋关节置换术、股骨干畸形(先天性或创伤后)、宽大的股骨髓腔以及内固定物残留。这些病例需要使用替代对线导向器,即髓外对线。本研究的目的是确定髓内对线在重现股骨干解剖轴方面的准确性。使用35具无明显临床畸形的成年尸体股骨,以及7具近端假体装置阻碍髓内导向器通过的股骨,从解剖学和放射学两方面评估导向杆的准确性。在7具近端有股骨装置的股骨中,导向杆无法完全就位,与35具无明显畸形的股骨相比,导致导向杆相对于股骨干机械轴有更大程度的屈曲,相对于解剖轴有更大程度的内翻。在髓内导向杆无法完全就位或根本无法就位的情况下,髓外股骨导向器通过直接参照机械轴(即股骨头中心),能更准确地确定股骨远端截骨。我们展示病例研究作为使用髓外股骨导向器的适应证示例。此外,我们展示了在与髓内对线不兼容的病例中,使用透视引导进行髓外股骨对线的两种不同技术。