» Articles » PMID: 26632405

Radiologic Outcomes According to Varus Deformity in Minimally Invasive Surgery Total Knee Arthroplasty

Overview
Journal Yonsei Med J
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2015 Dec 4
PMID 26632405
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: To identify the accuracy of postoperative implant alignment in minimally invasive surgery total knee arthroplasty (MIS-TKA), based on the degree of varus deformity.

Materials And Methods: The research examined 627 cases of MIS-TKA from November 2005 to December 2007. The cases were categorized according to the preoperative degree of varus deformity in the knee joint in order to compare the postoperative alignment of the implant: less than 5° varus (Group 1, 351 cases), 5° to less than 10° varus (Group 2, 189 cases), 10° to less than 15° varus (Group 3, 59 cases), and 15° varus or more (Group 4, 28 cases).

Results: On average, the alignment of the tibial implant was 0.2±1.4°, 0.1±1.3°, 0.1±1.6°, and 0.3±1.7° varus, and the tibiofemoral alignment was 5.2±1.9degrees, 4.7±1.9°, 4.9±1.9°, and 5.1±2.0° valgus for Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively, in the preoperative stage, indicating no difference between the groups (p>0.05). With respect to the accuracy of the tibial implant alignment, 98.1%, 97.6%, 87.5%, and 86.7% of Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively, had 0±3° varus angulation, demonstrating a reduced level of accuracy in Groups 3 and 4 (p<0.0001). There was no difference in terms of tibiofemoral alignment, with 83.9%, 82.9%, 85.4%, and 86.7% of each group, respectively, showing 6±3° valgus angulation (p>0.05).

Conclusion: Satisfactory component alignment was achieved in minimally invasive surgery in total knee arthroplasty, regardless of the degree of varus deformity.

Citing Articles

[A prospective randomized controlled study of total knee arthroplasty via mini-subvastus and conventional approach].

Yao Y, Kang P, Xue C, Jing J Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2018; 32(2):162-168.

PMID: 29806405 PMC: 8414080. DOI: 10.7507/1002-1892.201710075.


Revision Arthroplasty Using a MUTARS® Prosthesis in Comminuted Periprosthetic Fracture of the Distal Femur.

Choi H, Nho J, Kim C, Kwon S, Park J, Suh Y Yonsei Med J. 2016; 57(6):1517-22.

PMID: 27593884 PMC: 5011288. DOI: 10.3349/ymj.2016.57.6.1517.

References
1.
Tsuji S, Tomita T, Fujii M, Laskin R, Yoshikawa H, Sugamoto K . Is minimally invasive surgery-total knee arthroplasty truly less invasive than standard total knee arthroplasty? A quantitative evaluation. J Arthroplasty. 2009; 25(6):970-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.06.016. View

2.
Cheng T, Liu T, Zhang G, Peng X, Zhang X . Does minimally invasive surgery improve short-term recovery in total knee arthroplasty?. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010; 468(6):1635-48. PMC: 2865591. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1285-9. View

3.
King J, Manner P, Stamper D, Schaad D, Leopold S . Is minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty associated with lower costs than traditional TKA?. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010; 469(6):1716-20. PMC: 3094635. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1648-2. View

4.
Lee M, Yim M, Wages J, Nakasone C . Component alignment after minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: results of the first 100 cases performed. J Arthroplasty. 2010; 26(6):926-30. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.08.013. View

5.
Hernandez-Vaquero D, Suarez-Vazquez A, Iglesias-Fernandez S . Can computer assistance improve the clinical and functional scores in total knee arthroplasty?. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469(12):3436-42. PMC: 3210277. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-011-2044-2. View