Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2022; 35(10): 1119-1125
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1722325
Original Article

A Flexible Intramedullary Guide Can Reduce the Anteroposterior Oversizing of Femoral Components Used in Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients with Osteoarthritis and Severe Distal Femoral Sagittal Bowing

Do Weon Lee
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
,
Joonhee Lee
2   Division of Knee Surgery, CM Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
,
Junpyo Lee
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
,
Du Hyun Ro
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
,
Myung Chul Lee
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
,
Hyuk-Soo Han 
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Traditionally, a rigid intramedullary rod has been used as the reference guide for femoral cutting in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, correct positioning of this rigid rod is difficult, especially in the knees with severe distal femoral sagittal bowing. A flexible intramedullary rod has been developed to address this problem. This study was performed to compare the sagittal alignment and clinical outcomes of TKAs performed with flexible and rigid femoral intramedullary guides. Thirty-eight knees that underwent primary TKAs with flexible intramedullary rods as femoral cutting guides were matched according to patient height and sex with 38 knees that underwent TKAs using conventional rigid rods. Clinical outcomes, including the range of motion and functional scores, and radiological variables, including the distal femoral bowing angle (DFBA), femoral component flexion angle (FFA), and mediolateral overhang and anteroposterior (AP) oversizing of femoral components, were evaluated. Clinical and radiological outcomes did not differ significantly between the flexible rod and conventional rigid rod groups. A subgroup analysis of knees with severe distal femoral sagittal bowing (DFBA >4 degrees) showed that the FFA was significantly larger in the flexible rod group than in the rigid rod group, with an average difference of 3 degrees (5.2 ± 2.4 vs. 2.2 ± 1.6 degrees, respectively, p = 0.022). In addition, the incidence of AP oversizing of femoral components was lower in the flexible rod group than in the rigid rod group (11.1 vs. 60.0%, respectively, p = 0.027). Relative to TKA with a rigid rod, TKA performed with a flexible femoral intramedullary guide resulted in more flexed sagittal alignment of femoral components in patients with severe distal femoral sagittal bowing. This greater flexion of the femoral component resulted in less AP oversizing. However, the use of a flexible rod had no impact on short-term clinical outcomes.

Keywords

flexible intramedullary guide - total knee arthroplasty - sagittal alignment - femoral component flexion

Note

This is a retrospective comparative study; therefore, we exempted the consent to participate.


Ethical Approval

This retrospective comparative study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (no. H- 2004-015-1115).


Authors' Contributions

D.W.L. conducted data analysis, data interpretation, and drafting of the manuscript. J.L. and J.L. performed data acquisition and data analysis. D.H.R. and M.C.L. did data acquisition and data interpretation. H.-S.H. conducted design, data acquisition, data interpretation, and manuscript revision.




Publication History

Received: 30 April 2020

Accepted: 12 November 2020

Article published online:
05 February 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Hood B, Blum L, Holcombe SA. et al. Variation in optimal sagittal alignment of the femoral component in total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 2017; 40 (02) 102-106
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Kang KT, Koh YG, Son J, Kwon OR, Lee JS, Kwon SK. Influence of increased posterior tibial slope in total knee arthroplasty on knee joint biomechanics: a computational simulation study. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (02) 572-579
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kang KT, Koh YG, Son J, Kwon OR, Park KK. Flexed femoral component improves kinematics and biomechanical effect in posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2019; 27 (04) 1174-1181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Kang KT, Kwon SK, Son J, Kwon OR, Lee JS, Koh YG. The increase in posterior tibial slope provides a positive biomechanical effect in posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2018; 26 (10) 3188-3195
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Marra MA, Strzelczak M, Heesterbeek PJC. et al. Flexing and downsizing the femoral component is not detrimental to patellofemoral biomechanics in posterior-referencing cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2018; 26 (11) 3377-3385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Tsukeoka T, Lee TH. Sagittal flexion of the femoral component affects flexion gap and sizing in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27 (06) 1094-1099
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Murphy M, Journeaux S, Hides J, Russell T. Does flexion of the femoral implant in total knee arthroplasty increase knee flexion: a randomised controlled trial. Knee 2014; 21 (01) 257-263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Koh YG, Lee JA, Lee HY, Suh DS, Kim HJ, Kang KT. Effect of sagittal femoral component alignment on biomechanics after mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Surg Res 2019; 14 (01) 400
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Haruta Y, Kawahara S, Tsuchimochi K, Hamasaki A, Hara T. Deviation of femoral intramedullary alignment rod influences coronal and sagittal alignment during total knee arthroplasty. Knee 2018; 25 (04) 644-649
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Ko JH, Han CD, Shin KH. et al. Femur bowing could be a risk factor for implant flexion in conventional total knee arthroplasty and notching in navigated total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (08) 2476-2482
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Chung BJ, Kang YG, Chang CB, Kim SJ, Kim TK. Differences between sagittal femoral mechanical and distal reference axes should be considered in navigated TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467 (09) 2403-2413
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hitt KD, Pierce TP, Jauregui JJ. et al. Use of a flexible intramedullary rod and its influence on patient satisfaction and femoral size in total knee arthroplasty. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 2015; 25 (03) 201-208
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Johal P, Hassaballa MA, Eldridge JD, Porteous AJ. The posterior condylar offset ratio. Knee 2012; 19 (06) 843-845
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hauser R, Smoliński J, Gos T. The estimation of stature on the basis of measurements of the femur. Forensic Sci Int 2005; 147 (2-3): 185-190
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Kim DI, Kwak DS, Han SH. Sex determination using discriminant analysis of the medial and lateral condyles of the femur in Koreans. Forensic Sci Int 2013; 233 (1-3): 121-125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Song SJ, Park CH, Bae DK. What to know for selecting cruciate-retaining or posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg 2019; 11 (02) 142-150
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Lustig S, Scholes CJ, Stegeman TJ, Oussedik S, Coolican MR, Parker DA. Sagittal placement of the femoral component in total knee arthroplasty predicts knee flexion contracture at one-year follow-up. Int Orthop 2012; 36 (09) 1835-1839
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Okamoto Y, Otsuki S, Nakajima M, Jotoku T, Wakama H, Neo M. Sagittal alignment of the femoral component and patient height are associated with persisting flexion contracture after primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2019; 34 (07) 1476-1482
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Chen SC, Zeng YM, Yan MN, Yue B, Zhang J, Wang Y. Effect of femoral component flexion implantation on the mediolateral bone-prosthetic fit in total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Surg 2017; 9 (01) 91-96
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Ettinger M, Calliess T, Howell SM. Does a positioning rod or a patient-specific guide result in more natural femoral flexion in the concept of kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty?. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2017; 137 (01) 105-110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Kim TK, Phillips M, Bhandari M, Watson J, Malhotra R. What differences in morphologic features of the knee exist among patients of various races? A systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2017; 475 (01) 170-182
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Hitt K, Shurman II JR, Greene K. et al. Anthropometric measurements of the human knee: correlation to the sizing of current knee arthroplasty systems. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85-A (Suppl. 04) 115-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Antony J, Tetsworth K, Hohmann E. Influence of sagittal plane component alignment on kinematics after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017; 25 (06) 1686-1691
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Tang WM, Chiu KY. Variances in sagittal femoral shaft bowing in patients undergoing TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008; 466 (04) 1008-1009
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar