Clinical impact of component placement in manually instrumented total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review. (1st September 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kazarian, Gregory S.; Lieberman, Elizabeth G.; Hansen, Erik J.; Nunley, Ryan M.; Barrack, Robert L.
• Is Part Of: Bone & joint journal. Volume 103B:Number 9(2021)
• Page Start: 1449
• Page End: 1456
• Publication Date: 2021-09-01
• Subjects: Total knee arthroplasty -- Implant alignment -- Implant rotation -- Implant overhang -- Implant size -- Patient-reported outcome measures -- Implant survival -- total knee arthroplasty (TKA) -- patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) -- FCA -- TSA -- femoral rotation -- Medline -- knees -- WOMAC -- patient-specific instrumentation -- valgus; Bones -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Joints -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Orthopedic surgery -- Periodicals; 617.47005
• DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.103B9.BJJ-2020-1639.R2
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2049-4394

Abstract

Abstract : 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.