The effect of alignment and BMI on failure of total knee replacement.

J Bone Joint Surg Am

Center for Hip and Knee Surgery, St. Francis Hospital-Mooresville, 1199 Hadley Road, Mooresville, IN 46158, USA. Ritter:

Published: September 2011

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of tibiofemoral alignment, femoral and tibial component alignment, and body-mass index (BMI) on implant survival following total knee replacement.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 6070 knees in 3992 patients with a minimum of two years of follow-up. Each knee was classified on the basis of postoperative alignment (overall tibiofemoral alignment and alignment of the tibial and the femoral component in the coronal plane). Failures (defined as revision for any reason other than infection) were analyzed with use of Cox regression; patient covariates included overall alignment, component alignments, and preoperative BMI.

Results: Failure was most likely to occur if the orientation of the tibial component was <90° relative to the tibial axis and the orientation of the femoral component was ≥8° of valgus (failure rate, 8.7%; p < 0.0001). In contrast, failure was least likely to occur if both the tibial and the femoral component were in a neutral orientation (≥90° and <8° of valgus, respectively) (failure rate, 0.2% [nine of 4633]; p < 0.0001). "Correction" of varus or valgus malalignment of the first implanted component by placement of the second component to attain neutral tibiofemoral alignment was associated with a failure rate of 3.2% (p = 0.4922) for varus tibial malalignment and 7.8% (p = 0.0082) for valgus femoral malalignment. A higher BMI was associated with an increased failure rate. Compared with patients with a BMI of 23 to 26 kg/m2, the failure rate in patients with a BMI of ≥41 kg/m2 increased from 0.7% to 2.6% (p = 0.0046) in well-aligned knees, from 1.6% to 2.9% (p = 0.0180) in varus knees, and from 1.0% to 7.1% (p = 0.0260) in valgus knees.

Conclusions: Attaining neutrality in all three alignments is important in maximizing total knee implant survival. Substantial "correction" of the alignment of one component in order to compensate for malalignment of the other component and thus produce a neutrally aligned total knee replacement can increase the risk of failure (p = 0.0082). The use of conventional guides to align a total knee replacement provides acceptable alignment; however, the surgeon should be aware that the patient's size, as determined by the BMI, is also a major factor in total knee replacement failure.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.00772DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

total knee
8
tibiofemoral alignment
8
tibial component
8
alignment
7
alignment bmi
4
bmi failure
4
failure total
4
knee replacement
4
replacement background
4
background purpose
4

Similar Publications

Multimodal analgesia and anesthesia have become the gold standard in total joint arthroplasty to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption and minimize complications associated with opioid use. There are several elements in an effective multimodal protocol, including oral medications, periarticular injection, regional nerve blocks, and spinal and general anesthesia. Many nonopioid medications are often used, such as acetaminophen and NSAIDs.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is an increasingly common challenge for arthroplasty surgeons. The survivorship of rTKA is significantly lower than that of primary total knee arthroplasty, resulting in increasing numbers of repeat rTKA. These repeat rTKAs present unique challenges including potentially massive bone loss and increased risk of infection.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is an increasingly common challenge for arthroplasty surgeons. The survivorship of rTKA is significantly lower than that of primary total knee arthroplasty, resulting in an increasing incidence of repeat rTKA. These cases present multifactorial challenges including the skin and soft-tissue envelopes, bone loss, ligamentous compromise, and often a history of periprosthetic joint infection.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Periprosthetic fractures and their associated complications present significant challenges for orthopaedic surgeons. It is important to provide an overview of the current management of periprosthetic fractures, including techniques for osteosynthesis and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty, as well as special considerations for periprosthetic acetabular fractures, periprosthetic tibial fractures, and interprosthetic femur fractures. In addition, the guiding principles for the management of potential subsequent complications including infection, nonunion, and instability are discussed.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Patient-reported outcome (PROs) instruments of knee function quality of life are routinely administered to patients after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS), an evidence-based threshold defining perceived outcomes, may be a useful indicator of strength and functional performance.

Purpose: To compare strength and functional performance between patients recovering from ACLR who did and did not meet PASS thresholds on associated PROs.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!