The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2007;89:381-387.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.00204
© 2007 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow CME: Take the activity for this article:
 Adult Knee Reconstruction Test 14: Spring 2007 (publication date May 15, 20...
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Patil, S.
Right arrow Articles by Colwell, C. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Patil, S.
Right arrow Articles by Colwell, C. W., Jr.
Related Collections
Right arrow Adult Knee
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Improving Tibial Component Coronal Alignment During Total Knee Arthroplasty with Use of a Tibial Planing Device

Shantanu Patil, MD1, Darryl D. D'Lima, MD1, James M. Fait, MD1 and Clifford W. Colwell, Jr., MD1

1 Shiley Center for Orthopaedic Research and Education at Scripps Clinic, 11025 North Torrey Pines Road, Suite 140, La Jolla, CA 92037. E-mail address for C.W. Colwell: colwell{at}scripps.edu

Investigation performed at the Shiley Center for Orthopaedic Research and Education at Scripps Clinic, La Jolla, California

Disclosure: The authors did not receive any outside funding or grants in support of their research for or preparation of this work. Neither they nor a member of their immediate families received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors, or a member of their immediate families, are affiliated or associated.

Background: The outcomes of knee arthroplasty have been shown to be affected by component alignment. Intramedullary and extramedullary alignment instrumentation are fairly effective for achieving the desired mean tibial component coronal alignment. However, there are outliers representing >3° of varus or valgus alignment with respect to the anatomic tibial shaft axis. We measured the efficacy of a custom tibial planing device for reducing the outliers in tibial alignment.

Methods: We designed a tibial planing tool in an effort to improve tibial alignment. In one cohort (100 knees), we used traditional intramedullary alignment instrumentation to make the tibial bone cut. In a second cohort (120 knees), we used intramedullary alignment instrumentation to make the cut and also used a custom tool to check the cut and to correct an inexact cut. Tibial tray alignment relative to the long axis of the tibial shaft was measured in the coronal and sagittal planes on postoperative radiographs. The target coronal alignment was 90° with respect to the tibial shaft axis (with <90° denoting varus alignment). A total of 100 anteroposterior radiographs and sixty-five lateral radiographs were analyzed for the group that was treated with traditional instrumentation alone, and a total of 120 anteroposterior radiographs and fifty-five lateral radiographs were analyzed for the group that was treated with use of the custom tibial planing device.

Results: The mean coronal alignment of the tibial component was 89.5° ± 2.1° in the group that was treated with traditional instrumentation alone and 89.6° ± 1.4° in the group that was treated with use of the custom planing device. Although the mean coronal alignment was not significantly different, the number of outliers was substantially reduced when the custom planing device was used. All 120 components that had been aligned with use of the custom planing device were within 3° of the target coronal alignment, compared with only eighty-seven of the 100 components that had been implanted with use of traditional intramedullary alignment alone (p = 0.05).

Conclusions: The use of a simple, inexpensive tibial planing device reduced the number of outliers due to tibial tray malalignment. Tibial varus has been associated with a higher risk of failure. Improving the accuracy of tibial component alignment may reduce the potential for poor clinical outcomes.

Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?