Search Results
Search for other papers by Charles Rivière in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Stefan Lazic in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Oliver Boughton in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Yann Wiart in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Loic Vïllet in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Justin Cobb in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Mechanical or anatomical alignment techniques create a supposedly ‘biomechanically friendly’ but often functionally limited prosthetic knee.
-
Alternative techniques for alignment in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) aim at being more anatomical and patient-specific, aiming to improve functional outcomes after TKA.
-
The kinematic alignment (KA) technique for TKA has shown good early clinical outcomes. Its role in extreme anatomical variation remains to be defined.
-
The restricted KA technique for TKA might be a reasonable option for patients with extreme anatomical variation.
-
While unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has many advantages over TKA, the revision rate remains higher compared with TKA. One major explanation is the relative ease with which a UKA can be converted to a TKA, compared with revising a TKA. This can be considered as an additional advantage of UKA. Another reason is that surgeons favour revising a UKA to a TKA in cases of degeneration of the other femorotibial compartment rather than performing a relatively simple re-operation of the knee by doing an additional UKA (staged bi-UKA).
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3:1–6. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170021
Search for other papers by Charles Rivière in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Stefan Lazic in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Loïc Villet in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Yann Wiart in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Sarah Muirhead Allwood in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Justin Cobb in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Conventional techniques for hip and knee arthroplasty have led to good long-term clinical outcomes, but complications remain despite better surgical precision and improvements in implant design and quality.
-
Technological improvements and a better understanding of joint kinematics have facilitated the progression to ‘personalized’ implant positioning (kinematic alignment) for total hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasty, the true value of which remains to be determined.
-
By achieving a true knee resurfacing, the kinematic alignment (KA) technique for TKA aims at aligning the components with the physiological kinematic axes of the knee and restoring the constitutional tibio-femoral joint line frontal and axial orientation and soft-tissue laxity.
-
The KA technique for THA aims at restoring the native ‘combined femoro-acetabular anteversion’ and the hip’s centre of rotation, and occasionally adjusting the cup position and design based on the assessment of the individual spine-hip relation.
-
The key element for optimal prosthetic joint kinematics (hip or knee) is to reproduce the femoral anatomy.
-
The transverse acetabular ligament (TAL) is the reference landmark to adjust the cup position.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3:98-105. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170022
