Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, König-Ludwig-Haus, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
J Knee Surg. 2022 Dec;35(14):1610-1618. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1728815. Epub 2021 May 1.
Calipered kinematically aligned (KA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) restores the patient's prearthritic joint lines and sets internal-external rotation of the tibial component parallel to the flexion-extension (FE) plane, which is not a mechanical alignment (MA) target. Two asymmetric tibial components designed for MA set the tibial component to either a femoral component (FC) target or a tibial tubercle (TT) target. The study determined the optimal asymmetric tibial component to use with KA as the one with smaller IE deviation from the MA target, greater coverage of tibial resection, and lower incidence of cortical overhang. The study included 40 patients treated with bilateral calipered KA TKA with different asymmetric tibial components in opposite knees. A best-fit of a kinematic tibial template to the tibial resection set the template's slot parallel to the knee's FE plane. Each asymmetric tibial component's anterior-posterior (AP) axis was set parallel to the slot. Computer tomography analysis determined the IE deviation (-internal/+ external) of each tibial component from its MA target, tibial resection coverage by the baseplate and insert, and incidence of cortical overhang. The patient-reported Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) determined outcomes. The mean IE deviation from the MA target was 2 degrees external for the FC-target asymmetric tibial component and -8 degrees internal for the TT-target asymmetric tibial component ( < 0.001). Tibial resection coverage by the baseplate (insert) was 88% (84%) for the FC target and 84% (79%) for the TT target ( < 0.001 for baseplate and insert). The FC target insert covered 3 mm more of the posterolateral resection ( < 0.001). Posteromedial coverage was comparable. The incidence of cortical overhang was 2.5% for each baseplate. There was no difference in FJS and OKS. When performing calipered KA, the more optimal design was the asymmetric tibial component with the FC target because of the smaller deviation from its MA target and the greater coverage of the tibial resection by the baseplate and insert.
卡尺测量的运动学对线(KA)全膝关节置换术(TKA)可恢复患者术前的关节线,并使胫骨组件的内外旋转与屈伸(FE)平面平行,这不是机械对线(MA)的目标。两种用于 MA 的不对称胫骨组件将胫骨组件设置为股骨组件(FC)目标或胫骨结节(TT)目标。该研究确定了与 KA 一起使用的最佳不对称胫骨组件,其 MA 目标的 IE 偏差较小,胫骨切除的覆盖范围更大,皮质覆盖范围较低。该研究纳入了 40 例双侧卡尺测量 KA TKA 患者,其对侧膝关节使用不同的不对称胫骨组件。使用运动学胫骨模板与胫骨切除拟合最佳,使模板的槽与膝关节的 FE 平面平行。每个不对称胫骨组件的前后(AP)轴与槽平行设置。计算机断层扫描分析确定了每个胫骨组件相对于其 MA 目标的 IE 偏差(内/外)、基板和插入物覆盖胫骨切除的范围以及皮质覆盖范围。患者报告的遗忘关节评分(FJS)和牛津膝关节评分(OKS)确定了结果。MA 目标的平均 IE 偏差为 FC-目标不对称胫骨组件的 2 度外旋和 TT-目标不对称胫骨组件的-8 度内旋( < 0.001)。基板(插入物)覆盖胫骨切除的范围为 FC 目标的 88%(84%)和 TT 目标的 84%(79%)(基板和插入物的差异均 < 0.001)。FC 目标插入物覆盖后外侧切除的范围多 3 毫米( < 0.001)。后内侧覆盖范围相当。每个基板的皮质覆盖范围为 2.5%。FJS 和 OKS 没有差异。在进行卡尺测量 KA 时,FC 目标的不对称胫骨组件设计更优,因为其 MA 目标的偏差较小,基板和插入物覆盖胫骨切除的范围更大。