Correctability of the knee joint observed under a stressed state

Efficacies of different surgical approaches in the treatment of hyperextension tibial plateau fractures

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical efficacies of an anteromedial combined with anterolateral approach versus posteromedial combined with anterolateral approach in the treatment of hyperextension tibial plateau fractures.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on the data of 112 patients with hyperextension tibial plateau fractures treated in the Orthopedics Department of No. 215 Hospital of Shaanxi Nuclear Industry from January 2020 to December 2022. The patients were categorized as the control group (anteromedial combined with anterolateral approach, n=62) and the observation group (posteromedial combined with anterolateral approach, n=60) in accordance with the surgical approaches they underwent. Clinical outcomes, surgical time, time needed to be able to undertake weight-bearing activities, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain scores, and the incidence of postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. Knee joint function was assessed using the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee scoring system. Changes in the posterior tibial slope and varus angles were evaluated using X-ray imaging.

RESULTS

All patients recovered from tibial plateau fractures after treatment, with their knee joint function returning to pre-injury status to a large degree. At 6 months postoperatively, there was no statistically significant difference in HSS knee scores between the two groups (P=0.775). However, at 12 months postoperatively, the HSS knee scores in the control group were significantly lower than those in the observation group (P < 0.001). Additionally, the rate of patients demonstrating excellent or good knee function was significantly lower in the control group than that in the observation group (P=0.041). In terms of pain evaluation, the VAS pain scores of patients were higher in the control group than those in the observation group on days 1 and 3 after surgery (P < 0.001), whereas no statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups on postoperative day 12 (P=0.337). At 6 months postoperatively, the posterior tibial slope angle was larger in the control group than that in the observation group (P < 0.01). The time needed to be able to undertake weight-bearing activities was markedly longer and the varus angle greater in the observation group than those in the control group on the day of surgery (P < 0.01). Lastly, there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P=0.045).

CONCLUSION

The posteromedial combined with anterolateral approach for treating hyperextension tibial plateau fractures has presented ideal clinical outcomes, reduced patients' pain, and promoted the recovery of their joint function without increasing the incidence of adverse reactions.

Functional preoperative assessment of coronal knee laxity better predicts postoperative patient outcomes than intraoperative surgeon-defined laxity in total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

Intraoperative laxity assessments in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are subjective, with few studies comparing against standardised preoperative and postoperative assessments. This study compares coronal knee laxity in TKA patients awake and anaesthetised, preprosthesis and postprosthesis implantation, evaluating relationships to patient-reported outcome measures.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 49 TKA joints included preoperative and postoperative computed tomography scans, stress radiographs and knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) questionnaire results preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. The imaging was used to assess functional laxity (FL) in awake patients, whereas computer navigation measured intraoperative surgical laxity (SL) preimplantation and postimplantation, with patients anaesthetised. Varus and valgus stress states and their difference, joint laxity, were measured.

RESULTS

SL was greater than FL in both preimplantation [8.1° (interquartile range, IQR 2.0°) and 3.8° (IQR 2.9°), respectively] and postimplantation [3.5° (IQR 2.3°) and 2.5° (IQR 2.7°), respectively]. Preimplantation, SL was more likely than FL to categorise knees as correctable to ±3° of the mechanical axis. Preoperative FL correlated with KOOS Symptoms (r = 0.33, p = .02) and quality of life (QOL) (r = 0.38, p = .01), whereas reducing medial laxity with TKA enhanced postoperative QOL outcomes (p = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Functional coronal knee laxity assessment of awake patients is generally lower than intraoperative surgical assessments of anaesthetised patients. Preoperative SL may result in overcorrection of coronal TKA alignment, whereas preoperative FL better predicts postoperative patient outcomes and reflects the patients' native and tolerable knee laxity. Preoperative FL assessment can be used to guide surgical planning.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Preoperative Joint Distraction Imaging and Planning Protocol for Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Current preoperative total knee arthroplasty (TKA) planning strategies are bone-referencing and do not consider the ligamentous profile of the knee. This study assessed the mean Hip-Knee-Ankle (HKA) angle of the planned Distracted Alignment (DA), an alignment output using a joint distraction radiology and planning protocol, which incorporates preoperative evaluation of ligament laxity.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 144 knees undergoing TKA was performed. Each patient received a preoperative computer tomograph scan, a weight-bearing antero-posterior knee radiograph, and distracted knee radiographs in extension and flexion. The imaging was used to develop a preoperative DA plan aiming for medio-lateral and extension-flexion space balance. The mean DA, weight-bearing, and arithmetic HKA angles were compared to each other, and to the HKA of a healthy nonarthritic population.

RESULTS

The mean weight-bearing, arithmetic, and planned DA HKA angles were 4.8° (interquartile range [IQR] 6.5°) varus, 0.4° (IQR 4.5°) varus, and 2.2° (IQR 4.0°) varus, respectively. This compares to a healthy adult HKA angle of 1.3° varus. The difference between the planned DA and arithmetic HKA angles was greater than 3° for 36% of the patients in the study population.

CONCLUSIONS

The planned DA HKA angle was fundamentally different from the arithmetic HKA angle, but comparable to a healthy population. Considering both hard and soft tissue information of the knee, we believe the planned DA resulting from the joint distraction radiology protocol allows for optimized preoperative surgical planning in TKA. This protocol has been shown to be clinically viable.

Definition of normal, neutral, deviant and aberrant coronal knee alignment for total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

One of the most pertinent questions in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is: what could be considered normal coronal alignment? This study aims to define normal, neutral, deviant and aberrant coronal alignment using large data from a computed tomography (CT)-scan database and previously published phenotypes.

METHODS

Coronal alignment parameters from 11,191 knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients were measured based on three dimensional reconstructed CT data using a validated planning software. Based on these measurements, patients' coronal alignment was phenotyped according to the functional knee phenotype concept. These phenotypes represent an alignment variation of the overall hip knee ankle angle (HKA), femoral mechanical angle (FMA) and tibial mechanical angle (TMA). Each phenotype is defined by a specific mean and covers a range of ±1.5° from this mean. Coronal alignment is classified as normal, neutral, deviant and aberrant based on distribution frequency. Mean values and distribution among the phenotypes are presented and compared between two populations (OA patients in this study and non-OA patients from a previously published study).

RESULTS

The arithmetic HKA (aHKA), combined normalised data of FMA and TMA, showed that 36.0% of knees were neutral within ±1 SD from the mean in both angles, 44.3% had either a TMA or a FMA within ±1-2 SD (normally aligned), 15.3% of the patients were deviant within ±2-3 SD and only 4.4% of them had an aberrant alignment (±3-4 SD in 3.4% and >4 SD in 1.0% of the patients respectively). However, combining the normalised data of HKA, FMA and TMA, 15.4% of patients were neutral in all three angles, 39.7% were at least normal, 27.7% had at least one deviant angle and 17.2% had at least one aberrant angle. For HKA, the males exhibited 1° varus and females were neutral. For FMA, the females exhibited 0.7° more valgus in mean than males and grew 1.8° per category (males grew 2.1° per category). For TMA, the males exhibited 1.3° more varus than females and both grew 2.3° and 2.4° (females) per category. Normal coronal alignment was 179.2° ± 2.8-5.6° (males) and 180.5 > ± 2.8-5.6° (females) for HKA, 93.1 > ± 2.1-4.2° (males) and 93.8 > ± 1.8-3.6° (females) for FMA and 86.7 > ± 2.3-4.6° (males) and 88 > ± 2.4-4.8° (females) for TMA. This means HKA 6.4 varus or 4.8° valgus (males) or 5.1° varus to 6.1° valgus was considered normal. For FMA HKA 1.1 varus or 7.3° valgus (males) or 0.2° valgus to 7.4° valgus was considered normal. For TMA HKA 7.9 varus or 1.3° valgus (males) or 6.8° varus to 2.8° valgus was considered normal. Aberrant coronal alignment started from 179.2° ± 8.4° (males) and 180.5 > ± 8.4° (females) for HKA, 93.1 > ± 6.3° (males) 93.8 > ± 5.4° (females) for FMA and 86.7 > ± 6.9° (males) and 88 > ± 7.2° (females) for TMA. This means HKA > 9.2° varus or 7.6° valgus (males) or 7.9° varus to 8.9° valgus was considered aberrant.

CONCLUSION

Definitions of neutrality, normality, deviance as well as aberrance for coronal alignment in TKA were proposed in this study according to their distribution frequencies. This can be seen as an important first step towards a safe transition from the conventional one-size-fits-all to a more personalised coronal alignment target. There should be further definitions combining bony alignment, joint surfaces' morphology, soft tissue laxities and joint kinematics.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.