Classification of coronal plane alignment of arthritic and healthy knees in Japan

Journal of Joint Surgery and Research Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-11 DOI:10.1016/j.jjoisr.2024.11.004
Gai Kobayashi, Masahiro Hasegawa, Yohei Yamabe, Shine Tone, Yohei Naito, Akihiro Sudo
{"title":"Classification of coronal plane alignment of arthritic and healthy knees in Japan","authors":"Gai Kobayashi,&nbsp;Masahiro Hasegawa,&nbsp;Yohei Yamabe,&nbsp;Shine Tone,&nbsp;Yohei Naito,&nbsp;Akihiro Sudo","doi":"10.1016/j.jjoisr.2024.11.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>There are geographic differences in the prevalence of coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) phenotypes. This study aimed to evaluate the CPAK classification of healthy and arthritic knees in Japan.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A cohort of arthritic knees (150 knees in 125 patients who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty) and a cohort of healthy knees (150 knees in 150 patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty or bipolar hip arthroplasty with healthy knees) underwent radiological assessment with long-leg radiographs and were categorized into nine phenotypes. The lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), mechanical and arithmetic hip–knee–ankle angles (mHKA and aHKA, respectively), and joint line obliquity were measured.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The mean LDFA was 88.1° and 86.9° in the arthritic and healthy knee cohorts, respectively, and the mean MPTA was 85.2° and 86.6°, respectively. The mean mHKA was −8.0° and −1.2° and the mean aHKA was −2.9° and −0.3° in the arthritic and healthy knee cohorts, respectively. There was no significant difference in the distribution of varus/valgus knee on mHKA between the arthritic and healthy knee cohorts. In the arthritic knee cohort, most were CPAK type I (97 knees, 64.7%). Healthy knees were most commonly classified as type II (71 knees, 47.3%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The distribution of varus/valgus knee was similar in Japanese arthritic and healthy knees. However, the distribution of the CPAK classification in the arthritic and healthy knees of Japanese individuals was different.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100795,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Joint Surgery and Research","volume":"3 1","pages":"Pages 26-30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Joint Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S294970512400032X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

There are geographic differences in the prevalence of coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) phenotypes. This study aimed to evaluate the CPAK classification of healthy and arthritic knees in Japan.

Methods

A cohort of arthritic knees (150 knees in 125 patients who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty) and a cohort of healthy knees (150 knees in 150 patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty or bipolar hip arthroplasty with healthy knees) underwent radiological assessment with long-leg radiographs and were categorized into nine phenotypes. The lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), mechanical and arithmetic hip–knee–ankle angles (mHKA and aHKA, respectively), and joint line obliquity were measured.

Results

The mean LDFA was 88.1° and 86.9° in the arthritic and healthy knee cohorts, respectively, and the mean MPTA was 85.2° and 86.6°, respectively. The mean mHKA was −8.0° and −1.2° and the mean aHKA was −2.9° and −0.3° in the arthritic and healthy knee cohorts, respectively. There was no significant difference in the distribution of varus/valgus knee on mHKA between the arthritic and healthy knee cohorts. In the arthritic knee cohort, most were CPAK type I (97 knees, 64.7%). Healthy knees were most commonly classified as type II (71 knees, 47.3%).

Conclusions

The distribution of varus/valgus knee was similar in Japanese arthritic and healthy knees. However, the distribution of the CPAK classification in the arthritic and healthy knees of Japanese individuals was different.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
日本患关节炎和健康膝关节冠状面排列的分类
目的膝关节冠状面排列(CPAK)表型的患病率存在地理差异。本研究旨在评估日本健康膝关节与关节炎膝关节的CPAK分类。方法采用长腿x线片对患关节炎的膝关节(125例首次全膝关节置换术患者中的150例膝关节)和健康的膝关节(150例健康的全髋关节置换术或双极髋关节置换术患者中的150例膝关节)进行放射学评估,并将其分为9种表型。测量股骨外侧远端角(LDFA)、胫骨内侧近端角(MPTA)、机械和算术髋关节-膝关节-踝关节角(mHKA和aHKA)以及关节线倾斜度。结果膝关节关节炎组和健康组的平均LDFA分别为88.1°和86.9°,平均MPTA分别为85.2°和86.6°。关节炎组和健康膝关节组的平均mHKA分别为- 8.0°和- 1.2°,平均aHKA分别为- 2.9°和- 0.3°。在mHKA上,关节炎组和健康组的膝关节内翻/外翻分布无显著差异。在关节炎膝关节队列中,大多数为CPAK I型(97个膝关节,64.7%)。健康膝关节最常见的分类为II型(71个,47.3%)。结论日本关节炎患者膝关节内翻/外翻分布与正常膝关节相似。然而,日本个体的CPAK分类在关节炎和健康膝关节中的分布是不同的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Tibial joint line correction and bone resection thickness influence the extension soft tissue balance in functionally aligned robotic arm-assisted cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty Relationship between intra-operative rotational knee kinematics and clinical outcomes in mechanically aligned bicruciate stabilized total knee arthroplasty Chronological changes in lower leg swelling up to one year after total knee arthroplasty: A prospective case series Functional knee positioning in total knee arthroplasty: Rationale and current evidence Understanding the development of and theory behind the Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee classification: Important concepts for contemporary total knee arthroplasty
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1