Correctability of the knee joint observed under a stressed state

Well-balanced postoperative knee joints are often based on subjective ‘feel’ of experienced surgeons rather than quantifiable references. Most alignment strategies continue to reference the bone despite the complexity in anatomical variations and presence of deformity. Categorical prescription of a singular alignment philosophy for all patients may not be appropriate. This study aims to characterize coronal alignment correctability in relation to anatomical measures to develop a mechanism for distinguishing patients for whom repeatable strategies are optimal in the form of alternative alignment techniques or advanced soft tissue balancing.

A consecutive series of 103 pre-operative knees who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were analysed. Pre-operative supine computer tomography (CT) scans were segmented, with output STL bone models placed against several stressed positions determined by the TELOS SD-900 (METAX, Germany) device. Anatomical analysis using two-dimensional (2D) –3D image registration was performed. Statistical analysis was conducted for variations in anatomical morphology and regression modelling was used to determine the relationship between these measurements and correctability of a patient.

The mean preoperative supine hip–knee–ankle (HKA) angle was 5.1° and 2.3°, lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA) was 2.0° and 3.1°, medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) was 3.7° and 3.0° varus for male and female, respectively. The mean laxity range was 4.3°. We found 36% of valgus patients and 55% of mild varus patients to be correctable. Supine HKA was a statistically significant predictor for correctability (P < 0.001). A statistically significant correlation between laxity and the HKA (P = 0.01) as well as LDFA angles (P = 0.01) exist for the mild varus cohort.

Relationship between HKA angle and the correctability of the knee joint to neutral in patients presenting with mild to moderate varus cannot be consistently predicted using bony anatomy. If there is a desire to avoid ligament release during TKA, careful consideration of both a patient’s bony anatomy and soft tissue laxity envelope must be made prior to surgery.