Appropriate determination of the surgical transepicondylar axis can be achieved following distal femur resection in navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty.

IF 4.1 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Knee Surgery & Related Research Pub Date : 2021-11-10 DOI:10.1186/s43019-021-00123-1
Sang Jun Song, Hyun Woo Lee, Kang Il Kim, Cheol Hee Park
{"title":"Appropriate determination of the surgical transepicondylar axis can be achieved following distal femur resection in navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty.","authors":"Sang Jun Song,&nbsp;Hyun Woo Lee,&nbsp;Kang Il Kim,&nbsp;Cheol Hee Park","doi":"10.1186/s43019-021-00123-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many surgeons have determined the surgical transepicondylar axis (sTEA) after distal femur resection in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, in most navigation systems, the registration of the sTEA precedes the distal femur resection. This sequential difference can influence the accuracy of intraoperative determination for sTEA when considering the proximal location of the anatomical references for sTEA and the arthritic environment. We compared the accuracy and precision in determinations of the sTEA between before and after distal femur resection during navigation-assisted TKA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ninety TKAs with Attune posterior-stabilized prostheses were performed under imageless navigation. The sTEA was registered before distal femur resection, then reassessed and adjusted after distal resection. The femoral component was implanted finally according to the sTEA determined after distal femur resection. Computed tomography (CT) was performed postoperatively to analyze the true sTEA (the line connecting the tip of the lateral femoral epicondyle to the lowest point of the medial femoral epicondylar sulcus on axial CT images) and femoral component rotation (FCR) axis. The FCR angle after distal femur resection (FCRA-aR) was defined as the angle between the FCR axis and true sTEA on CT images. The FCR angle before distal resection (FCRA-bR) could be presumed to be the value of FCRA-aR minus the difference between the intraoperatively determined sTEAs before and after distal resection as indicated by the navigation system. It was considered that the FCRA-bR or FCRA-aR represented the differences between the sTEA determined before or after distal femur resection and the true sTEA, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The FCRA-bR was -1.3 ± 2.4° and FCRA-aR was 0.3 ± 1.7° (p < 0.001). The range of FCRA-bR was from -6.6° to 4.1° and that of FCRA-aR was from -2.7° to 3.3°. The proportion of appropriate FCRA (≤ ±3°) was significantly higher after distal femur resection than that before resection (91.1% versus 70%; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The FCR was more appropriate when the sTEA was determined after distal femur resection than before resection in navigation-assisted TKA. The reassessment and adjusted registration of sTEA after distal femur resection could improve the rotational alignment of the femoral component in navigation-assisted TKA.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>IV.</p>","PeriodicalId":17886,"journal":{"name":"Knee Surgery & Related Research","volume":"33 1","pages":"41"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8579642/pdf/","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knee Surgery & Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-021-00123-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Background: Many surgeons have determined the surgical transepicondylar axis (sTEA) after distal femur resection in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, in most navigation systems, the registration of the sTEA precedes the distal femur resection. This sequential difference can influence the accuracy of intraoperative determination for sTEA when considering the proximal location of the anatomical references for sTEA and the arthritic environment. We compared the accuracy and precision in determinations of the sTEA between before and after distal femur resection during navigation-assisted TKA.

Methods: Ninety TKAs with Attune posterior-stabilized prostheses were performed under imageless navigation. The sTEA was registered before distal femur resection, then reassessed and adjusted after distal resection. The femoral component was implanted finally according to the sTEA determined after distal femur resection. Computed tomography (CT) was performed postoperatively to analyze the true sTEA (the line connecting the tip of the lateral femoral epicondyle to the lowest point of the medial femoral epicondylar sulcus on axial CT images) and femoral component rotation (FCR) axis. The FCR angle after distal femur resection (FCRA-aR) was defined as the angle between the FCR axis and true sTEA on CT images. The FCR angle before distal resection (FCRA-bR) could be presumed to be the value of FCRA-aR minus the difference between the intraoperatively determined sTEAs before and after distal resection as indicated by the navigation system. It was considered that the FCRA-bR or FCRA-aR represented the differences between the sTEA determined before or after distal femur resection and the true sTEA, respectively.

Results: The FCRA-bR was -1.3 ± 2.4° and FCRA-aR was 0.3 ± 1.7° (p < 0.001). The range of FCRA-bR was from -6.6° to 4.1° and that of FCRA-aR was from -2.7° to 3.3°. The proportion of appropriate FCRA (≤ ±3°) was significantly higher after distal femur resection than that before resection (91.1% versus 70%; p < 0.001).

Conclusions: The FCR was more appropriate when the sTEA was determined after distal femur resection than before resection in navigation-assisted TKA. The reassessment and adjusted registration of sTEA after distal femur resection could improve the rotational alignment of the femoral component in navigation-assisted TKA.

Level of evidence: IV.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
在导航辅助的全膝关节置换术中,股骨远端切除术后可适当确定手术经髁轴。
背景:许多外科医生已经确定了全膝关节置换术(TKA)中股骨远端切除术后的手术经髁轴(sTEA)。然而,在大多数导航系统中,sTEA的定位先于股骨远端切除术。当考虑到sTEA解剖参考点的近端位置和关节炎环境时,这种顺序差异会影响术中sTEA测定的准确性。我们比较了导航辅助TKA期间股骨远端切除前后测定sTEA的准确性和精密度。方法:在无图像导航的情况下,对90例tka进行后稳定修复。sTEA在股骨远端切除术前登记,在远端切除术后重新评估和调整。根据股骨远端切除术后确定的sTEA,最终植入股骨假体。术后行计算机断层扫描(CT)分析真sTEA(轴向CT图像上连接股外侧上髁尖端至股内侧上髁沟最低点的线)和股成分旋转轴(FCR)。股骨远端切除术后的FCR角(FCR - ar)定义为CT图像上FCR轴与真sTEA之间的夹角。远端切除前的FCR角(FCRA-bR)可推定为导航系统显示的FCRA-aR值减去术中测定的远端切除前后的stea之差。我们认为FCRA-bR或FCRA-aR分别代表了股骨远端切除术前后测定的sTEA与真实sTEA之间的差异。结果:FCRA-bR为-1.3±2.4°,FCRA-aR为0.3±1.7°(p)。结论:在导航辅助TKA中,股骨远端切除后测定sTEA比切除前测定FCR更合适。股骨远端切除术后sTEA的重新评估和调整配准可以改善导航辅助TKA中股骨假体的旋转对准。证据等级:四级。
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
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Analysis of radiographic factors affecting the significant differences in knee alignment between hip-to-talus and hip-to-calcaneus radiographs after opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy Ramp lesion in anterior cruciate ligament injury: a review of the anatomy, biomechanics, epidemiology, and diagnosis. Total knee arthroplasty in dialysis patients: a national in-patient sample-based study of perioperative complications. Does body mass index influence improvement in patient reported outcomes following total knee arthroplasty? A retrospective analysis of 3918 cases. Home ownership, full-time employment, and other markers of higher socioeconomic status are predictive of shorter time to initial evaluation, shorter time to surgery, and superior postoperative outcomes among lateral patellar instability patients undergoing medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction.
×
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:481959085
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