Skip to main content
Log in

Kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty

Kinematisches Alignment in der Knieendoprothetik

  • Operative Techniken
  • Published:
Operative Orthopädie und Traumatologie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The objective of kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty is to implant the prosthesis according to the individual joint line, leg axis and ligament tension.

Indications

Knee osteoarthritis with failure of nonsurgical treatment according to current guidelines.

Contraindications

Severe deformity or instability requiring a constrained knee prosthesis. Necessity of intramedullary stems.

Surgical technique

Medial parapatellar approach to the knee. Resection of the cruciate ligaments, the meniscus and the osteophytes. Femur-first technique with distal resection of the femur, the intramedullary guide is only used for the extension/flexion positioning of the femoral component. The positioning in varus–valgus is orientated according to the native joint line after correction of chondral wear. The distal resection should be equal to the thickness of the prosthesis considering the chondral wear (up to 2 mm) and the thickness of the saw blade (1 mm). The rotation of the femoral component is set according to the posterior condylar axis under consideration of chondral wear. The amount of resected dorsal bone should correspond to the thickness of the dorsal condyles of the prosthesis. The alignment of the tibia is parallel to the individual joint line. This enables reconstruction of the individual physiological slope, rotation and the varus–valgus axis. Extension and flexion gap are controlled. Asymmetries between the lateral and medial joint space are corrected through a varus or valgus recut of the tibia as long as the surgical planning has not been achieved. The hip–knee angle is controlled; however, the aim in kinematic alignment is to reconstruct the individual axes and ligament tensions and not a straight leg axis. Persisting asymmetries in ligament tension are adjusted by classical soft tissue balancing techniques. Differences between the extension and flexion spaces are corrected by adapting the tibial slope. Release of the ligaments is usually not necessary; sometimes a stripping of the dorsal capsule is performed. After the trial implantation, the original prosthesis is implanted.

Postoperative management

Functional rehabilitation with weight bearing as tolerated.

Results

Randomized studies showed a better function in the Knee Society Score and a better range of motion with kinematically aligned prostheses compared to mechanical alignment. Available meta-analyses also showed better results for kinematically aligned knees. The first mid-term results of this new technique with a follow-up of 10 years show a survival rate of 97.5% of the prosthesis.

Zusammenfassung

Operationsziel

Ziel des kinematischen Alignment in der Knietotalendoprothetik ist es, die Prothese entsprechend der individuellen Gelenklinie, Beinachse und Bandspannung zu implantieren.

Indikationen

Fortgeschrittene Pangonarthrose nach Versagen der konservativen Maßnahmen entsprechend der geltenden Leitlinie.

Kontraindikationen

Schwere Achsabweichungen bzw. Instabilität, welche die Versorgung mit einer (teil)gekoppelten Knietotalendoprothese erforderlich machen. Notwendigkeit für eine intramedulläre Schaftverankerung.

Operationstechnik

Medialer parapatellarer Zugang zum Kniegelenk. Entfernung der Kreuzbänder, der Menisken und sämtlicher Osteophyten. Femur-first-Vorgehen mit distaler Femurresektion, die intramedulläre Ausrichtung dient nur zur Festlegung des Extension-Flexion-Winkels der Femurkomponente. Die Ausrichtung des Varus-Valgus-Winkels orientiert sich an der ursprünglichen Gelenklinie mit Korrektur des Knorpelabriebs. Die distale Resektion sollte der Dicke der Prothese unter Berücksichtigung des Knorpelabriebs (bis zu 2 mm) und der Dicke des Sägeblatts (1 mm) entsprechen. Die Rotation der Femurkomponente wird entsprechend der posterioren Kondylenachse unter Berücksichtigung eines möglichen Knorpelabriebs eingestellt. Das Maß des resezierten dorsalen Knochens sollte ebenfalls der Dicke der dorsalen Prothesenkondylen entsprechen. Die Ausrichtung der Tibia erfolgt parallel zur individuellen Gelenklinie, unter Rekonstruktion des individuellen physiologischen Slope, der Rotation und der Varus-Valgus-Achse. Anschließend werden der Streck- und der Beugespalt kontrolliert. Asymmetrien zwischen dem lateralen und medialen Gelenkspalt werden durch einen Varus- oder Valgusrückschnitt der Tibia korrigiert, sofern die Gelenklinie nicht exakt der präoperativen Planung entspricht. Der Hüft-Knie-Winkel wird kontrolliert, allerdings ist das Ziel bei der kinematischen Ausrichtung die Rekonstruktion der einzelnen Achsen und Bandspannungen und nicht eine gerade Beinachse. Fortbestehende Asymmetrien in der Bandspannung werden durch klassische Weichteilausgleichstechniken korrigiert, Differenzen zwischen Streck- und Beugespalt durch eine Anpassung des tibialen Slope. Ein Release der Ligamente ist in der Regel nicht erforderlich, gelegentlich muss die dorsale Kapsel etwas gelöst werden. Im Anschluss an die Probeeinsetzung erfolgt die Prothesenimplantation.

Weiterbehandlung

Mobilisation ab dem Operationstag unter Vollbelastung und unter freier Beweglichkeit.

Ergebnisse

Randomisierte Studien haben für die kinematische im Vergleich zur mechanischen Ausrichtung günstigere Ergebnisse im funktionellen Bereich des Knee-Society-Scores und einen höheren Bewegungsumfang nachgewiesen. Verfügbare Metaanalysen haben bessere Ergebnisse nach kinematischer Ausrichtung ergeben. Erste Zwischenergebnisse zu dieser neuen Technik mit einem Follow-up von 10 Jahren zeigen eine Prothesenüberlebensrate von 97,5 %.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sheth NP, Husain A, Nelson CL (2017) Surgical techniques for total knee arthroplasty: measured resection, gap balancing, and hybrid. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 25(7):499–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mercuri JJ et al (2019) Gap balancing, measured resection, and kinematic alignment: how, when, and why? JBJS Rev 7(3):e2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bellemans J et al (2012) The Chitranjan Ranawat Award: Is neutral mechanical alignment normal for all patients? The concept of constitutional varus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470(1):45–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Williams DP et al (2013) Early postoperative predictors of satisfaction following total knee arthroplasty. Knee 20(6):442–446

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Parvizi J et al (2014) High level of residual symptoms in young patients after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472(1):133–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Nam D, Nunley RM, Barrack RL (2014) Patient dissatisfaction following total knee replacement: a growing concern? Bone Joint J 96–B(11 Suppl A):96–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Howell SM et al (2008) Results of an initial experience with custom-fit positioning total knee arthroplasty in a series of 48 patients. Orthopedics 31(9):857–863

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Freeman MA, Pinskerova V (2005) The movement of the normal tibio-femoral joint. J Biomech 38(2):197–208

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Steinbruck A et al (2016) Femorotibial kinematics and load patterns after total knee arthroplasty: an in vitro comparison of posterior-stabilized versus medial-stabilized design. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 33:42–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lutzner J et al (2018) The S2k guideline: indications for knee endoprosthesis: evidence and consent-based indications for total knee arthroplasty. Orthopade 47(9):777–781

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Laende EK, Richardson CG, Dunbar MJ (2019) A randomized controlled trial of tibial component migration with kinematic alignment using patient-specific instrumentation versus mechanical alignment using computer-assisted surgery in total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 101–B(8):929–940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Nam D et al (2014) Femoral bone and cartilage wear is predictable at 0 degrees and 90 degrees in the osteoarthritic knee treated with total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(12):2975–2981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Riviere C et al (2017) Alignment options for total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 103(7):1047–1056

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Calliess T et al (2017) PSI kinematic versus non-PSI mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(6):1743–1748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ji HM et al (2016) Kinematically aligned TKA can align knee joint line to horizontal. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24(8):2436–2441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dossett HG et al (2014) A randomised controlled trial of kinematically and mechanically aligned total knee replacements: two-year clinical results. Bone Joint J 96–B(7):907–913

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dossett HG et al (2012) Kinematically versus mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 35(2):e160–e169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Waterson HB et al (2016) The early outcome of kinematic versus mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised control trial. Bone Joint J 98–B(10):1360–1368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Young SW et al (2017) The Chitranjan S. Ranawat Award: No difference in 2‑year functional outcomes using kinematic versus mechanical alignment in TKA: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 475(1):9–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Takahashi T, Ansari J, Pandit HG (2018) Kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty or mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 31(10):999–1006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Yoon JR et al (2017) Comparison of kinematic and mechanical alignment techniques in primary total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. Medicine 96(39):e8157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lee YS et al (2017) Kinematic alignment is a possible alternative to mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(11):3467–3479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Xu J et al (2019) Kinematic versus mechanical alignment for primary total knee replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Orthop 16(2):151–157

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Howell SM, Shelton TJ, Hull ML (2018) Implant survival and function ten years after kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 33(12):3678–3684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Srivastava A et al (2012) Effect of tibial component varus on wear in total knee arthroplasty. Knee 19(5):560–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Howell SM et al (2013) Does a kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty restore function without failure regardless of alignment category? Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(3):1000–1007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hutt J et al (2016) Functional joint line obliquity after kinematic total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 40(1):29–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Almaawi AM et al (2017) The impact of mechanical and restricted kinematic alignment on knee anatomy in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 32(7):2133–2140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Evans JT et al (2019) How long does a knee replacement last? A systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and national registry reports with more than 15 years of follow-up. Lancet 393(10172):655–663

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Weber.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

P. Weber and H. Gollwitzer declare that they have no competing interests. They are consultants for Medacta, Castel San Pietro, Switzerland. There was no influence of the company on the content of the article.

For this article no studies with human participants or animals were performed by any of the authors. All studies performed were in accordance with the ethical standards indicated in each case.

Additional information

Redaktion

O. Rühmann, Laatzen

Zeichnungen

R. Himmelhan, Mannheim

figure qr

Scan QR code & read article online

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Weber, P., Gollwitzer, H. Kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Oper Orthop Traumatol 33, 525–537 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00064-021-00729-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00064-021-00729-4

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Navigation