Kinematic Implant Procedure

Introduction: Recent studies reported that the kinematic alignment of an implant is more physiological than the traditional methods, and therefore results in better clinical outcomes. They found that for kinematic alignment of the implant, the femoral component should be positioned varus 2.3 degrees and tibial component in valgus 2.4 degrees without any rotation. Howell et al also claimed that kinematically aligned TKA does not cause any significant failure; rather, it restores the function of the knee.

Objectives: The purpose of our study is to certify correlation between parameters of implant position and postoperative clinical outcomes after kinematic alignment of TKA.

Methods: We obtained all 32 patients with primary osteoarthritis who need surgical treatment. During operation we targeted tibial varus of 2 degree and femoral valgus of 2 degree on coronal plane, and neutral rotation on axial …show more content…
Results: Clinical outcomes including post op knee scoring and ROM was improved. There were negative linear relationships between the femoral component rotation (internal and external) and active and passive range of motion after kinematic alignment of TKA. And we also found a negative linear relationship between the tibial rotation of the component and active and passive range of motion. And we also found a negative linear relationship between the gamma angle and active and passive range of motion. The gamma angle is most powerful predictive parameter of postoperative range of motion of the knee.

Conclusions: The alignment of the component set into the kinematic alignment of the knee: internal rotation of femur implant with good gamma angle in sagittal plane will assure better clinical outcome; ROM and scores. Coronal alignments of component (valgus or varus) were weak predictive