METHODS: Nine full-text articles in English that reported the clinical and radiological outcomes of KA TKA were included. Five studies had a control group of patients who underwent MA TKA. Data on patient demographics, clinical scores, and radiological results were extracted. There were two level I, one level II, three level III, and three level IV studies. Six of the nine studies used patient-specific instrumentation, one study used computer navigation, and two studies used manual instrumentation.
RESULTS: The clinical outcomes of KA TKA were comparable or superior to those of MA TKA with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Limb and knee alignment in KA TKA was similar to those in MA TKA, and component alignment showed slightly more varus in the tibial component and slightly more valgus in the femoral component. The JLOA in KA TKA was relatively parallel to the floor compared to that in the native knee and not oblique (medial side up and lateral side down) compared to that in MA TKA. The implant survivorship and complication rate of the KA TKA were similar to those of the MA TKA.
CONCLUSION: Similar or better clinical outcomes were produced by using a KA TKA at early-term follow-up and the component alignment differed from that of MA TKA. KA TKA seemed to restore function without catastrophic failure regardless of the alignment category up to midterm follow-up. The JLOA in KA TKA was relatively parallel to the floor similar to the native knee compared to that in MA TKA. The present review of nine published studies suggests that relatively new kinematic alignment is an acceptable and alternative alignment to mechanical alignment, which is better understood. Further validation of these findings requires more randomized clinical trials with longer follow-up.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.
METHODS: Three different cams (triangle, ellipse, and circle) and three different posts (straight, convex, concave) geometries were considered in this study and were analysed using kinematic analyses. Femoral rollback did not occur until reaching 50° of knee flexion. Beyond this angle, two of the nine combinations demonstrate poor knee flexion and were eliminated from the study.
RESULTS: The combination of circle cam with concave post, straight post and convex post showed 15.6, 15.9 and 16.1 mm posterior translation of the femur, respectively. The use of ellipse cam with convex post and straight post demonstrated a 15.3 and 14.9 mm femoral rollback, whilst the combination of triangle cam with convex post and straight post showed 16.1 and 15.8 mm femoral rollback, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrates that the use of circle cam and convex post created the best femoral rollback effect which in turn produces the highest amount of knee flexion. The findings of the study suggest that if the design is applied for knee implants, superior knee flexion may be possible for future patients.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.