» Articles » PMID: 39583347

A Restriction Boundary-Based Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) Classification for Restricted Kinematic Alignment Total Knee Arthroplasty

Overview
Journal Cureus
Date 2024 Nov 25
PMID 39583347
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background Coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) classification was proposed as a means of understanding the knee phenotype in leg alignment and joint line obliquity (JLO). However, when it is adapted to restricted kinematic alignment total knee arthroplasty (rKA-TKA), the boundaries of CPAK and those of rKA-TKA phenotype are different. We therefore reappraise the boundary between the CPAK classification and restriction protocol and propose a restriction boundary-based CPAK (Rb-CPAK). Methods Between May 2020 and March 2022, 143 knees in 95 patients underwent rKA at our institution and were included in this study. In Rb-CPAK, we set the following ranges: 6° varus to 3° valgus for arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA), 0° to 6° varus for the medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), 0° to 5° valgus for the lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), and 169° to 180° for JLO. The pre- and postoperative alignments were classified using the original CPAK and Rb-CPAK. Results There were significant differences in pre- and postoperative distributions between original CPAK and Rb-CPAK (p < 0.0001). Postoperative Rb-CPAK primarily led to neutral aHKA (116 of 143 knees), and decreased MPTA varus (pre: 83.9 ± 3.4, post: 87.0 ± 2.3, p < 0.0001) and stable LDFA values (pre: 88.7 ± 3.1, post: 88.5 ± 2.7, p = 0.4) were observed. Among cases with neutral JLO, 78 knees required MPTA or LDFA corrections. Postoperatively, 67 (64%) out of 119 knees categorized as neutral JLO fell within MPTA and LDFA ranges. Conclusion The Rb-CPAK modification more effectively outlined knees that required restriction, and the restriction was properly performed compared with the original CPAK. However, JLO does not effectively indicate if a knee requires restriction or not, and thus individual evaluation of LDFA and MPTA might be necessary.

References
1.
Young S, Sullivan N, Walker M, Holland S, Bayan A, Farrington B . No Difference in 5-year Clinical or Radiographic Outcomes Between Kinematic and Mechanical Alignment in TKA: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020; 478(6):1271-1279. PMC: 7319387. DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001150. View

2.
McEwen P, Dlaska C, Jovanovic I, Doma K, Brandon B . Computer-Assisted Kinematic and Mechanical Axis Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of Bilateral Simultaneous Surgery. J Arthroplasty. 2019; 35(2):443-450. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.08.064. View

3.
Bar Ziv Y, Essa A, Lamykin K, Chacar N, Livshits G, Khatib S . Minimum 2-Year Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes of Unrestricted Kinematic Alignment Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients with Excessive Varus of the Tibia Component. J Pers Med. 2022; 12(8). PMC: 9329737. DOI: 10.3390/jpm12081206. View

4.
Takahashi T, Ansari J, Pandit H . Kinematically Aligned Total Knee Arthroplasty or Mechanically Aligned Total Knee Arthroplasty. J Knee Surg. 2018; 31(10):999-1006. DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1632378. View

5.
Kanda Y . Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software 'EZR' for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2012; 48(3):452-8. PMC: 3590441. DOI: 10.1038/bmt.2012.244. View