Abstract:PurposeThe alignment obtained after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) influences the risk of failure. Kinematic alignment after UKA based on Cartier angle restauration is likely to improve clinical outcomes compared with mechanical alignment. The purpose of this study is to analyze the influence of implant alignment and native knee restoration after UKA using the conventional techniques on clinical outcomes.MethodsThis retrospective study included 144 medial UKA patients from 2015 to 2020. Radiographic measurements were performed pre- and postoperatively. Outliers were defined as follows: Δ Cartier > 3° (difference between the preoperative and postoperative Cartier angle); Δ MPTA (Medial Proximal Tibial angle) and postoperative TCA (Tibial Coronal component Angle) > 3° (difference between the positioning of the tibial implant and the preoperative proximal tibial deformity). The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the International Knee Society (IKS) Function and Knee score, the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and the Subjective Knee Value (SKV) were evaluated.A Student t test or a non-parametric Wilcoxon test was used for non-normal data to compare pre- and postoperative values for functional scores and angular measurements. The correlation of postoperative angles with functional outcomes was assessed by the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient.Results During the inclusion period, 214 patients underwent medial UKA, 71 patients were excluded, and 19 were lost to follow-up leaving 124 patients with 144 knees (20 bilateral UKA) included for analysis with a mean follow-up of 54.7 months ± 22.1 (24–95). The Δ Cartier was significantly correlated with IKS function (R2 = 0.06, p < 0.001) and FJS (R2 = 0.05, p < 0.01) scores. The Δ preoperative MPTA–TCA was significantly correlated (p < 0.001) with KOOS (R2 = 0.38), IKS Knee (R2 = 0.17), IKS function (R2 = 0.34), SKV (R2 = 0.08), and FJS (R2 = 0.37) scores. In subgroup analysis, non-outliers (< 3°) for Δ preoperative MPTA–TCA had better KOOS score (Δ = 23.5, p < 0.001) and IKS Function (Δ = 17.7, p < 0.001) compared to outliers (> 3°) patients.Conclusion Functional results after medial UKA can be influenced by implant alignment in the coronal plane with slight clinical improvement when positioning the tibial implant close to the preoperative tibial deformity, rather than by restoring the Cartier angle. This series suggests the interest of a more personalized alignment strategy, but these results will have to be confirmed by other controlled studies.Level of evidenceIV, retrospective case series.

Personalized alignment techniques better restore the native trochlear groove compared to systematic alignment techniques in total knee arthroplasty

The effect of different alignment strategies on trochlear orientation after total knee arthroplasty

Kinematic alignment recreates femoral trochlear geometry more closely than mechanical alignment in total knee arthroplasty

Restoration of the native tibial joint line obliquity in total knee arthroplasty with inverse kinematic alignment does not increase knee adduction moments

Kinematic alignment adequately restores trochlear anatomy, patellar kinematics and kinetics in total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review

Alignment in TKA: what has been clear is not anymore!

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

No Difference in Limb Alignment Between Kinematic and Mechanical Alignment Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty

Inverse kinematic total knee arthroplasty using conventional instrumentation restores constitutional coronal alignment

Large multiplanar changes to native alignment have no apparent impact on clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty

Higher satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty using restricted inverse kinematic alignment compared to adjusted mechanical alignment

Kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty reproduces more native rollback and laxity than mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty: A matched pair cadaveric study

Restricted kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty with an anatomically designed implant can restore constitutional coronal lower limb alignment

Kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a five-year prospective, multicentre, survivorship study

Is There a Gold Standard for TKA Tibial Component Rotational Alignment?

Conventionally instrumented inverse kinematic alignment for total knee arthroplasty: How is it done?

Does inverse kinematic alignment coupled with robot-assisted TKA optimize patellofemoral clinical and radiological results?

Restoration of preoperative tibial alignment improves functional results after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

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

Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: What is the optimal alignment correction to achieve success? The role of kinematic alignment

Boundaries in Kinematic Alignment: Why, When, and How