Abstract:BACKGROUND: The notion that neutral alignment is mandatory to assure long-term durability after TKA has been based mostly on short-film studies. However, this is challenged by recent long-film studies.QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We conducted this long-film study to know (1) whether the risk of aseptic revision for nontraumatic reasons was greater among knees with greater than 3° varus or valgus (defined as "outliers") than those that were aligned within 3° of neutral on long-standing mechanical axis (hip to knee) radiographs; and (2) what the failure mechanisms were and whether the malalignment was femoral or tibial in origin, or both, among those in the outlier group.METHODS: Between November 1998 and January 2009 we performed 1299 cemented, posterior cruciate ligament-substituting TKAs in 867 patients for primary osteoarthritis. We had inadequate long-standing radiographs to analyze postoperative alignment for 124 of those knees, and an additional 24 were excluded for prespecified reasons. Consequently, 1151 knees were enrolled in our study. Of these, 982 (85%) in 661 patients (620 women and 41 men) who had followup greater than 24 months were analyzed. The knees were divided according to whether the postoperative mechanical axis was neutral (0° ± 3°), varus (> 3°), or valgus (< -3°) alignment on long-standing radiographs. The survivorships free from aseptic revision for nontraumatic reasons were compared among groups. The mechanical femoral and the tibial component alignment (MFCA and MTCA, respectively) were investigated to know the origin of overall mechanical malalignment of the outlier knees. The mean duration of followup was 8 ± 4 years (range, 2-17 years). Thirty-five knees (4%) showed aseptic loosening at 7 ± 4 years (range, 0.1-14 years) and five (1%) showed polyethylene wear at 12 ± 1 years (range, 10-13 years). Tibial loosening (73%) was the most common reason for aseptic revision followed by femoral loosening (30%). Of this cohort, 687 (70%), 250 (25%), and 45 (5%) knees had overall mechanical neutral, varus, and valgus alignment, respectively. Factors associated with the risk of aseptic revision were identified by Cox regression.RESULTS: The varus outliers (but not the valgus outliers) failed more often than the neutral knees (10% [25 of 250] versus 2% [13 of 687]; odds ratio [OR], 5.8, 95% CI, 2.9-11.5; p < 0.001). Ten-year survivorship free from aseptic revision was lower among varus outliers than among knees with neutral alignment (87% [95% CI, 80%-93%] versus 98% [95% CI, 97%-99%]; p = 0.001). Femoral component varus malpositioning was the main origin of the varus outliers (MFCA = 4.2° ± 2.0°; MTCA = 0.9° ± 1.7°) and was a risk factor for aseptic revision compared with neutral femoral positioning (OR, 14.0; 95% CI, 1.9-105.6; p < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS: This long-film study corresponds to previous short-film studies for the notion that varus malalignment is associated with inferior long-term implant survivorship. Although aseptic loosening occurred most commonly on the tibial side, the primary origin of the overall varus malalignment was femoral component varus malpositioning. Aiming for neutral alignment in TKA still seems to be a reasonable strategy in clinical practice.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Maintenance of the joint line and posterior condylar offset are the most notable variables for successful outcomes of revision total knee arthroplasty

High Rates of Early Septic Failure, But Low Rates of Aseptic Loosening after Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Contemporary Rotating-Hinge Prostheses

Preliminary outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty using a new fixed-bearing revision knee system in Asians: a mean of 3-year follow-up

Outcomes of Liner Exchange Versus Component Revision for the Treatment of Stiffness Following Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

Better restoration of joint line obliquity in tibia first restricted kinematic alignment versus mechanical alignment TKA

Functional alignment maximises advantages of robotic arm‐assisted total knee arthroplasty with better patient‐reported outcomes compared to mechanical alignment

Femoral Component Varus Malposition is Associated with Tibial Aseptic Loosening After TKA

Rate of complications and short-term Functional Results of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Tibio-femoral Instability: Do stability and range of motion are restored in 62 revisions

Infection and periprosthetic fracture are the leading causes of failure after aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty

Complications and Reinterventions of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in a Korean Population: 14-Year Experience in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

Revision total knee arthroplasty for flexion instability : a concise follow-up of a previous report

Big data analysis reveals significant increases in complications, costs, and hospital stay in revision total knee arthroplasty compared to primary TKA

Mid-to-long Term Clinical Outcomes and Predictors after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Re-Vision

The Effects of Surgical Technique in Total Knee Arthroplasty for Varus Osteoarthritic Knee on the Rotational Alignment of Femoral Component: Gap Balancing Technique versus Measured Resection Technique

Contemporary outcomes of tibial tubercle osteotomy for revision total knee arthroplasty

Predictors of outcome following two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty

The necessity of revisions for failed primary total knee arthroplasty

Complications after Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in the Korean Population: A Single Center Study of 299 Cases

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes for Patients Treated With Gradually Reducing Radius Versus Single-Radius Total Knee Arthroplasty Systems

Early Rate of Revision of Total Hip Arthroplasty Related to Surgical Approach: An Analysis of 122,345 Primary Total Hip Arthroplasties

Higher satisfaction and function scores in restricted kinematic alignment versus mechanical alignment with medial pivot design total knee arthroplasty: A prospective randomised controlled trial