» Articles » PMID: 36645475

Effect of Total Knee Arthroplasty for Valgus Knee Correction on Clinical Outcome and Patellar Position

Overview
Journal Int Orthop
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2023 Jan 16
PMID 36645475
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The purpose was to investigate the effect of different degrees of valgus deformity correction on patellar position and clinical outcome in patients with valgus knees after total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed and followed 118 patients with valgus knees. Based on the post-operative hip-knee-ankle (HKA), patients were divided into three groups: neutral (±3°), mild (3-6°), and severe (> 6°). Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), range of motion (ROM), and Knee Society Score (KSS) were used to evaluate post-operative clinical efficacy. Also, the patellar tilt angle (ε-angle), congruence angle (θ-angle), and Insall-Salvati index (ISI) were used to represent the patellar position. Post-operative observation indicators included HKA, angle of the femur (α-angle), tibial angle (β-angle), femoral component flexion angle (γ-angle), and tibial component posterior slope angle (δ-angle).

Results: All patients showed significant improvements in HKA, ROM, WOMAC, and KSS after operation (P < 0.001). Regarding patellar position, the ISI values decreased to varying degrees (P < 0.05). The patellar tilt angle was significantly increased in the severe valgus group compared to that in the mild valgus and neutral groups (P < 0.001). Univariate analysis showed that the degree of post-operative residual valgus was significantly affected by WOMAC, KSS, α-, ε-, and θ-angles.

Conclusion: Minor valgus undercorrection did not affect the short-term outcome after TKA; however, when the residual valgus angle was > 6°, the post-operative scores were significantly reduced. Inadequate valgus correction does not result in significant changes in patellar height but may increase the risk of poor patellar tracking.

Citing Articles

Comparative efficacy and safety of bicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and update meta-analysis.

Zhang R, Shen X, Yan K, Zhang X, Zhu C J Orthop Surg Res. 2025; 20(1):237.

PMID: 40045336 PMC: 11881321. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-05384-6.


Bi-cruciate stabilized total knee arthroplasty restores the native knee alignments better than conventional posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty.

Park S, Cho J, Nam H, Ho J, Lee Y Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024; 145(1):31.

PMID: 39666122 DOI: 10.1007/s00402-024-05714-7.


Effects of preoperative valgus deformity in patients undergoing neutrally aligned total knee arthroplasty: A retrospective cohort study with a minimum five-year follow-up.

Liu X, Yu Q, Chen X, Zeng W, Zhou Z Jt Dis Relat Surg. 2024; 35(3):529-537.

PMID: 39189561 PMC: 11411898. DOI: 10.52312/jdrs.2024.1800.

References
1.
Howell S, Howell S, Kuznik K, Cohen J, Hull M . Does a kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty restore function without failure regardless of alignment category?. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012; 471(3):1000-7. PMC: 3563808. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-012-2613-z. View

2.
Adie S, Harris I, Chuan A, Lewis P, Naylor J . Selecting and optimising patients for total knee arthroplasty. Med J Aust. 2019; 210(3):135-141. DOI: 10.5694/mja2.12109. View

3.
Vanlommel L, Vanlommel J, Claes S, Bellemans J . Slight undercorrection following total knee arthroplasty results in superior clinical outcomes in varus knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013; 21(10):2325-30. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-013-2481-4. View

4.
Baker P, van der Meulen J, Lewsey J, Gregg P . The role of pain and function in determining patient satisfaction after total knee replacement. Data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007; 89(7):893-900. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B7.19091. View

5.
Bourne R, Chesworth B, Davis A, Mahomed N, Charron K . Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not?. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009; 468(1):57-63. PMC: 2795819. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9. View