Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Knee osteoarthritis is a growing socioeconomic burden because of the ageing and obesity. By 2030, the majority of individuals undergoing knee arthroplasty in USA will be those younger than 65 years, with up to 1 million achieved annually.
The definitive treatment for knee joint degeneration is total knee arthroplasty.
Furthermore, the commonest technique is neutral mechanical alignment total knee arthroplasty. Latest studies have revealed that the mechanical alignment technique repeatedly causing substantial anatomical alterations with a widespread of complex collateral ligament imbalances, which are not repairable by collateral ligament release. Consequently, the total knee arthroplasty individuals walk with an abnormal gait, and they do not experience a normal knee joint. This may be one of the causes that up to 20% of total knee arthroplasty individuals are disappointed, and over 50% may have remaining symptoms.
Consequently, the conventional mechanical alignment technique has been recently challenged by a new alternative technique, namely unrestricted kinematic alignment proposed by Howell, as a possible solution to the high dissatisfaction following total knee arthroplasty, aiming at reproducing the constitutional tibiofemoral tridimensional alignment and knee laxity. It is almost a pure bone procedure with only exceptional collateral ligament release, which has been shown to reliably position knee components.
The restricted kinematic alignment protocol suggested by Vendittoli has been developed as an alternative to the unrestricted kinematic alignment for patients with an outlier or atypical knee anatomy. The restricted kinematic alignment is founded on five principles: hip-knee-ankle angle should be maintained within ± 3° postoperatively; a limitation to a maximum of 5° for lateral distal femoral angle and medial proximal tibial angle may be considered; restoration of collateral ligament balance should be achieved without the gap balancing technique; native femoral anatomy preservation is suggested over tibial one to maintain knee biomechanics; resurface resection must be accomplished on the unworn side with a thickness equivalent to the width of the implant;cut fine-tuning may be sought at the worn side.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unrestricted kinematic alignment | Experimental | reproducing the constitutional tibiofemoral tridimensional alignment and knee laxity. It is almost a pure bone procedure with only exceptional collateral ligament release, which has been shown to reliably position knee components. | |
| Restricted kinematic alignment | Experimental | reproducing patient's constitutional knee anatomy within a safe range while avoiding extreme or pathological anatomies that have been demonstrated to exist. |
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total knee arthroplasty | Procedure | Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a common orthopaedic surgery that involves replacing the articular surfaces (femoral condyles and tibial plateau) of the knee joint with smooth metal and highly cross-linked polyethylene plastic |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Oxoford knee score | The Oxford Knee Score is a 12-item patient-reported outcomes specifically designed and developed to assess function and pain after total knee replacement arthroplasty. It is short, reproducible, valid and sensitive to clinically important changes. Score each question from 0 to 4 with 4 being the best outcome. This method, when summed, produces overall scores running from 0 to 48 with 48 being the best outcome | 12 months |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score | The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score is a questionnaire designed to assess short and long-term patient-relevant outcomes following knee injury. The questionnaire is self-administered and assesses five outcomes: pain(9 items), symptoms(7 items), activities of daily living(17 items), sport and recreation function(5 items), and knee-related quality of life (4 items). The questionnaire meets basic criteria of outcome measures and can be used to evaluate the course of knee injury and treatment outcome. A Likert scale is used and all items have five possible answer options scored from 0 (No problems) to 4 (Extreme problems) and each of the five scores is calculated as the sum of the items included. Scores are transformed to a 0-100 scale, with zero representing extreme knee problems and 100 representing no knee problems as common in orthopaedic scales and generic measures. Scores between 0 and 100 represent the percentage of total possible score achieved. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
-Patients suffered from end stage knee osteoarthritis of grade four according to Kellgren-Lawrence classification in at least one of the three knee compartments, who have an osteoarthritic knees of varus Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee classification
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yaser E Khalifa, Professor | Contact | +201005673622 | yaserkhalifa@aun.edu.eg | |
| Mohammad K Abdelnasser, Ass. Professor | Contact | +201002438664 | Abdelnasser.m.k@aun.edu.eg |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Sohibe A Ghietah, Specialist | Assiut University | Principal Investigator |
Not provided
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Howell SM HM. Kinematic alignment in TKA: definition, surgical technique, and challenging cases.. Orthopedic Knowledge Online. 2012; 10(7). | ||
| 35812351 | Result | Risitano S, Cacciola G, Sabatini L, Capella M, Bosco F, Giustra F, Masse A, Vaishya R. Restricted kinematic alignment in primary total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review of radiographic and clinical data. J Orthop. 2022 Jul 2;33:37-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2022.06.014. eCollection 2022 Sep-Oct. | |
| 37329371 |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010003 | Osteoarthritis |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001168 | Arthritis |
| D007592 | Joint Diseases |
| D009140 | Musculoskeletal Diseases |
| D012216 | Rheumatic Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D019645 | Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D019643 | Arthroplasty, Replacement |
| D001178 | Arthroplasty |
| D019637 | Orthopedic Procedures |
| D013514 | Surgical Procedures, Operative |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| 24 months |
| Forgotten Joint Score | The Forgotten Joint Score was designed to assess patient outcome in patients undergoing conservative or operative treatment of the knee. This questionnaire shows its strengths in patients with a good level of knee function and a low pain level. It has been designed specifically to reduce ceiling effects commonly associated with many patients reported outcome measures in this patient group, e.g. when assessing short- to mid-term results in total knee arthroplasty patients. Every question is scored 1 (never) to 5 (mostly) according to the selected response categories. Thus, the raw score ranges from 12 to 60. The raw score is linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale and then reversed to obtain the final score. Final score = 100 - ((sum(item01 to item12) - 12)/48*100) For the final 'Forgotten Joint Score -12' a high score indicates good outcome. | 24 months |
| Result |
| Albishi W, AbuDujain NM, Arafah O, Alshaygy IS, Aldosari ZA, Alhuqbani MN, Alangari SM. Cross-cultural adaptation, validity and reliability of the Arabic version of the Forgotten Joint Score for knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023 Oct;31(10):4312-4318. doi: 10.1007/s00167-023-07484-y. Epub 2023 Jun 17. |
| 22000572 | Result | Behrend H, Giesinger K, Giesinger JM, Kuster MS. The "forgotten joint" as the ultimate goal in joint arthroplasty: validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure. J Arthroplasty. 2012 Mar;27(3):430-436.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.06.035. Epub 2011 Oct 13. |
| 24095836 | Result | Almangoush A, Herrington L, Attia I, Jones R, Aldawoudy A, Abdul Aziz A, Waley A. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, internal consistency and validation of the Arabic version of the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) for Egyptian people with knee injuries. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013 Dec;21(12):1855-64. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2013.09.010. Epub 2013 Oct 2. |
| 9699158 | Result | Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)--development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998 Aug;28(2):88-96. doi: 10.2519/jospt.1998.28.2.88. |
| 30848244 | Result | Ahmed KM, Said HG, Ramadan EKA, Abd El-Radi M, El-Assal MA. Arabic translation and validation of three knee scores, Lysholm Knee Score (LKS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC). SICOT J. 2019;5:6. doi: 10.1051/sicotj/2018054. Epub 2019 Mar 8. |
| 9460955 | Result | Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998 Jan;80(1):63-9. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.80b1.7859. |
| 33517740 | Result | MacDessi SJ, Griffiths-Jones W, Harris IA, Bellemans J, Chen DB. Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification. Bone Joint J. 2021 Feb;103-B(2):329-337. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.103B2.BJJ-2020-1050.R1. |
| 34355018 | Result | Vendittoli PA, Martinov S, Blakeney WG. Restricted Kinematic Alignment, the Fundamentals, and Clinical Applications. Front Surg. 2021 Jul 20;8:697020. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.697020. eCollection 2021. |
| 26776100 | Result | Hutt JR, LeBlanc MA, Masse V, Lavigne M, Vendittoli PA. Kinematic TKA using navigation: Surgical technique and initial results. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2016 Feb;102(1):99-104. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2015.11.010. Epub 2016 Jan 6. |
| 16140800 | Result | Ranawat AS, Ranawat CS, Elkus M, Rasquinha VJ, Rossi R, Babhulkar S. Total knee arthroplasty for severe valgus deformity. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Sep;87 Suppl 1(Pt 2):271-84. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.E.00308. |
| 20048101 | Result | Howell SM, Howell SJ, Hull ML. Assessment of the radii of the medial and lateral femoral condyles in varus and valgus knees with osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010 Jan;92(1):98-104. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.01566. |
| 21656315 | Result | Bellemans J, Colyn W, Vandenneucker H, Victor J. The Chitranjan Ranawat award: is neutral mechanical alignment normal for all patients? The concept of constitutional varus. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Jan;470(1):45-53. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-1936-5. |
| 25381418 | Result | Nam D, Nunley RM, Barrack RL. Patient dissatisfaction following total knee replacement: a growing concern? Bone Joint J. 2014 Nov;96-B(11 Supple A):96-100. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B11.34152. |
| 19844772 | Result | Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KD. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Jan;468(1):57-63. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9. |
| 22459101 | Result | Collins M, Lavigne M, Girard J, Vendittoli PA. Joint perception after hip or knee replacement surgery. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012 May;98(3):275-80. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2011.08.021. Epub 2012 Mar 28. |
| 30276435 | Result | Blakeney W, Clement J, Desmeules F, Hagemeister N, Riviere C, Vendittoli PA. Kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty better reproduces normal gait than mechanical alignment. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019 May;27(5):1410-1417. doi: 10.1007/s00167-018-5174-1. Epub 2018 Oct 1. |
| 28302462 | Result | Almaawi AM, Hutt JRB, Masse V, Lavigne M, Vendittoli PA. The Impact of Mechanical and Restricted Kinematic Alignment on Knee Anatomy in Total Knee Arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2017 Jul;32(7):2133-2140. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.02.028. Epub 2017 Feb 20. |
| 24671469 | Result | Cherian JJ, Kapadia BH, Banerjee S, Jauregui JJ, Issa K, Mont MA. Mechanical, Anatomical, and Kinematic Axis in TKA: Concepts and Practical Applications. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2014 Jun;7(2):89-95. doi: 10.1007/s12178-014-9218-y. |
| 28870873 | Result | Riviere C, Iranpour F, Harris S, Auvinet E, Aframian A, Chabrand P, Cobb J. The kinematic alignment technique for TKA reliably aligns the femoral component with the cylindrical axis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2017 Nov;103(7):1069-1073. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2017.06.016. Epub 2017 Sep 1. |
| D019651 | Plastic Surgery Procedures |
| D019919 | Prosthesis Implantation |