How to assess femoral and tibial component rotation after total knee arthroplasty with computed tomography: a systematic review

PurposeOne of the most important factors leading to revision of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) is malrotation of femoral and/or tibial component. Rotation measurements performed on radiographs are limited and less reliable compared to 2D computed tomography (CT). Nowadays, 2D-CT and 3D-CT can be distinguished in measuring rotation of the TKA components. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the most reliable CT techniques in measuring rotation of the TKA components and to investigate possible cut-off points that can be used in the clinician’s decision for a possible revision of the TKA.MethodsA search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science was performed up to April 2015. Final selections of 12 articles were used in this systematic review.Results3D-CT, compared to 2D-CT, is more reliable and shows a high level of intra- and interobserver reliability. Femoral component rotation is measured using the component’s posterior condylar line or inner pegs in relation to the epicondylar axis. Five different techniques were used to measure tibial component rotation. The posterior border of the tibial component in relationship to the geometric centre and tibial tubercle was most frequently used.ConclusionThis systematic review shows a strong preference for 3D-CT to determine the component’s rotation following a TKA. The literature shows consensus on the reference points of the femoral component. In measurements of the tibial component, various techniques are used with similar results. No clear cut-off point for revision of malrotated TKA components can be stated because of limited evidence.Level of evidenceIII.

[1]  G. Scuderi**,et al.  Anatomy of the epicondyles of the distal femur: MRI analysis of normal knees. , 2000, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[2]  Lynette M. Smith,et al.  Inter- and Intraobserver Reliability of Two-dimensional CT Scan for Total Knee Arthroplasty Component Malrotation , 2014, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[3]  L. Biant,et al.  Predicting dissatisfaction following total knee replacement , 2010 .

[4]  R. V. van Geenen,et al.  Effect of rotational alignment on outcome of total knee arthroplasty , 2015, Acta orthopaedica.

[5]  D. Tigani,et al.  Revision of knee prostheses with components malrotation: treatment algorithm using a computed tomographic analysis , 2010 .

[6]  D. Backstein,et al.  Revision total knee arthroplasty for component malrotation is highly beneficial: a case control study. , 2010, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[7]  D. Zurakowski,et al.  Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. A comparison of computer-assisted surgery with the conventional technique. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[8]  R A Berger,et al.  Determining the rotational alignment of the femoral component in total knee arthroplasty using the epicondylar axis. , 1993, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[9]  D. Backstein,et al.  The benefit of revision knee arthroplasty for component malrotation after primary total knee replacement , 2012, International Orthopaedics.

[10]  C. Pfirrmann,et al.  Femoral and tibial torsion measurements with 3D models based on low-dose biplanar radiographs in comparison with standard CT measurements. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  P. Sharkey,et al.  Why Are Total Knee Arthroplasties Failing Today? , 2002 .

[12]  F. C. Ewald.  The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. , 1989, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[13]  C. Drury,et al.  Component rotational alignment in unexplained painful primary total knee arthroplasty. , 2014, The Knee.

[14]  Karen Sloan,et al.  Good alignment after total knee arthroplasty leads to faster rehabilitation and better function. , 2009, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[15]  M. Lohman,et al.  Comparison of Standard Anteroposterior Knee and Hip-to-Ankle Radiographs in Determining the Lower Limb and Implant Alignment after Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2009, Scandinavian journal of surgery : SJS : official organ for the Finnish Surgical Society and the Scandinavian Surgical Society.

[16]  F. Kummer,et al.  The accuracy of computed tomography for determining femoral and tibial total knee arthroplasty component rotation. , 2000, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[17]  Yoshinori Kadoya,et al.  Axial Radiography of the Distal Femur to Assess Rotational Alignment in Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2005, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[18]  Michael T. Hirschmann,et al.  A novel standardized algorithm for evaluating patients with painful total knee arthroplasty using combined single photon emission tomography and conventional computerized tomography , 2010, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.

[19]  J. Bellemans,et al.  The influence of malrotation and femoral component material on patellofemoral wear during gait. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[20]  G. Scuderi**,et al.  The posterior condylar angle in osteoarthritic knees. , 1998, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[21]  Karen Sloan,et al.  Stiffness after total knee arthroplasty: does component alignment differ in knees requiring manipulation? A retrospective cohort study of 281 patients. , 2013, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[22]  S. Descamps,et al.  Computed tomographic study of the posterior condylar angle in arthritic knees: its use in the rotational positioning of the femoral implant of total knee prostheses , 2003, Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy.

[23]  F M Rodriguez y Baena,et al.  Very low-dose computed tomography for planning and outcome measurement in knee replacement. The imperial knee protocol. , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[24]  K. Vince,et al.  Internal Rotation of the Tibial Component is Frequent in Stiff Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2011, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[25]  F Krummenauer,et al.  Computer-assisted and conventional total knee replacement: a comparative, prospective, randomised study with radiological and CT evaluation. , 2008, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[26]  Jang-Won Park,et al.  The relationship between the survival of total knee arthroplasty and postoperative coronal, sagittal and rotational alignment of knee prosthesis , 2014, International Orthopaedics.

[27]  Johann Henckel,et al.  4D-SPECT/CT in orthopaedics: a new method of combined quantitative volumetric 3D analysis of SPECT/CT tracer uptake and component position measurements in patients after total knee arthroplasty , 2013, Skeletal Radiology.

[28]  J P Cobb,et al.  The position and orientation of total knee replacement components: a comparison of conventional radiographs, transverse 2D-CT slices and 3D-CT reconstruction. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[29]  C. Howie,et al.  Predicting dissatisfaction following total knee replacement: a prospective study of 1217 patients. , 2010, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[30]  J. J. Jacobs,et al.  Malrotation Causing Patellofemoral Complications After Total Knee Arthroplasty , 1998, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[31]  C. Roberts,et al.  Analysis of tibial component rotation following total knee arthroplasty using 3D high definition computed tomography. , 2013, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[32]  H. Rubash,et al.  Rotational instability and malrotation after total knee arthroplasty. , 2001, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[33]  B. Yue,et al.  Gender-based differences in the dimensions of the femoral trochlea and condyles in the Chinese population: correlation to the risk of femoral component overhang. , 2014, The Knee.