Restoring the level of the knee joint line during revision arthroplasty: randomized controlled trial

The spatial orientation of the endoprosthesis components and the level of the joint line are the conditions for the success of revision knee arthroplasty.  

The OBJECTIVE was to test the proposed tool for precision restoration of the level of the knee joint line along the top of the head of the fibula and to evaluate the effectiveness of the technique based on the results of revision arthroplasty. 

METHODS AND MATERIALS. A single center randomized controlled study was conducted at the Department of Traumatology, Orthopedics and Disaster Surgery of the Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of Russia (Sechenov University). Inclusion criteria: aseptic loosening and aging of the knee joint components. Two groups of patients: the first (main) group underwent revision TKA with determination of the level of the joint line according to the method proposed by us using the original instrument, the second (control) – revision arthroplasty according to the standard method. A total of 64 patients were included in the study: 26 men and 38 women, mean age – 66.5±7.2 years, BMI on average – 32.9±2.6 kg/m2, the average period of revision knee arthroplasty was 36.3±6.7 months. Before and after the operation, CT and X-ray in the frontal plane were performed, the height of the joint line was measured, focusing on the top of the head of the fibula; testing on the VAS pain scale, knee joint scales: OKS, FJS-12, KSS, SF-36 for 12 months after operation.  

RESULTS. According to CT data, the height of the joint line in the frontal plane before surgery: group I – 21.9±3.3 mm, group II – 23.4±2.1 mm (p=0.946), after surgery: group I – 23.7±3.4 mm, group II – 20.8±3.0 mm, p=0.584). When testing for VAS, OKS, FJS–12, KSS, SF–36 for 12 months, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups.  

CONCLUSION. The proposed method and instrument make it possible to position the level of the knee joint line more accurately (by 3.9 % according to CT data and by 6.4 % according to X-ray data) during revision arthroplasty. 

1. Canovas F., Dagneaux L. Quality of life after total knee arthroplasty // Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2018;104(1S):S41–S46.

2.

3. Rivière C., Iranpour F., Auvinet E., Howell S., Vendittoli P. A., Cobb J., Parratte S. Alignment options for total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review // Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2017;103(7):1047–1056.

4.

5. Clavé A., Le Henaff G., Roger T., Maisongrosse P., Mabit C., Dubrana F. Joint line level in revision total knee replacement: assessment and functional results with an average of seven years follow-up // Int Orthop. 2016;40(8):1655–1662.

6.

7. Maderbacher G., Keshmiri A., Schaumburger J. et al. Accuracy of bony landmarks for restoring the natural joint line in revision knee surgery: an MRI study // Int Orthop. 2014;38:1173–1181.

8.

9. Mason M., Belisle A., Bonutti P. et al. An accurate and reproducible method for locating the joint line during a revision total knee arthroplasty // J Arthroplasty. 2006;21:1147–1153.

10.

11. Savov P., Ettinger M., Tuecking L. R. PSI-technique for kinematic alignment // Orthopedic. 2020;49(7):597–603.

12.

13. Chatain F., Denjean S., Delalande J. L., Chavane H., Bejui-Hugues J., Guyen O. Computer-navigated revision total knee arthroplasty for failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty // Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012;98(6):720–7.

14.

15. Kulyaba T. A., Kornilov N. N., Tikhilov R. M. Guidelines for revision knee arthroplasty. St. Petersburg: NMITs TO them. R. R. Vreden, 2021:400. (In Russ.). ISBN 978-5-6040358-7-0.

16.

17. Bovkis G. Y., Kulyaba T. A., Kornilov N. N. Joint line restoration during revision knee replacement (Literature review) // Department of Traumatology and Orthopedics. 2020(4):29–36. (In Russ.). Doi: 10.17238/issn2226- 2016.2020.4.29-36.

18.

19. Van Lieshout W. A. M., Valkering K. P., Koenraadt K. L. M., van Etten- Jamaludin F. S., Kerkhoffs G. M. M. J., van Geenen R. C. I. The negative effect of joint line elevation after total knee arthroplasty on outcome // Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019;27(5):1477–1486. Doi: 10.1007/s00167-018- 5099-8.

20.

21. Bieger R., Huch K., Kocak S., Jung S., Reichel H., Kappe T. The influence of joint line restoration on the results of revision total knee arthroplasty: comparison between distance and ratio methods // Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014;134:537–541.

22.

23. Hofmann A. A., Kurtin S. M., Lyons S., Tanner A. M., Bolognesi M. P. Clinical and radiographic analysis of accurate restoration of the joint line in revision total knee arthroplasty // J Arthroplast. 2006;21:1154–1162.

24.

25. Partington P. F., Sawhney J., Rorabeck C. H., Barrack R. L., Moore J. Joint line restoration after revision total knee arthroplasty // Clin Orthop Relat Res. 199;367:165–171. 14. Porteous A. J., Hassaballa M. A., Newman J. H. Does the joint line matter in revision total knee replacement? // J Bone Jt Surg Br. 2008;90: 879–884.

26.

27. Clement N., MacDonald D. Posterior condylar offset is an independent predictor of functional outcome after revision total knee arthroplasty // J Bone Jt Surg. 2017;6:172–178.

28.

29. Kannan A., O’Connell R. S., Kalore N., Curtin B. M., Hull J. R., Jiranek W. A. Revision TKA for flexion instability improves patient reported outcomes // J Arthroplast. 2015;30:818–821.

30.

31. Seon J.-K., Song E.-K. Joint line and patellar height restoration after revision total knee arthroplasty // Indian J Orthop. 2016;50:159–165.

32.

33. Vera-Aviles F. A., Jimenez-Aquino J. M. Total knee arthroplasty. Prognosis after restoring the joint line // Acta Ortop Mex. 2012;26:362–368.

34.

35. Babazadeh S., Dowsey M. M., Swan J. D., Stoney J. D., Choong P. F. M. Joint line position correlates with function after primary total knee replacement: a randomised controlled trial comparing conventional and computer-assisted surgery // J Bone Jt Surg Br. 2011;93:1223–1231.

36.

37. Yang J.-H., Seo J.-G., Moon Y.-W., Kim M.-H. Joint line changes after navigation-assisted mobile-bearing TKA // Orthopedics. 2009;32:35–39.

38.

39. Bin Abd Razak H. R., Pang H. N., Yeo S. J., Tan M. H., Lo N. N., Chong H. C. Joint line changes in cruciate-retaining versus posteriorstabilized computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty // Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2013;133:853–859.

40.

41. Goh G. S. H., Liow M. H. L., Lim W. S. R., Tay D. K. J., Yeo S. J., Tan M. H. Accelerometer-based navigation is as accurate as optical computer navigation in restoring the joint line and mechanical axis after total knee arthroplasty. A prospective matched study // J Arthroplast. 2016;31:92–97.

42.

43. Lee K.-J., Moon J.-Y., Song E.-K., Lim H.-A., Seon J.-K. Minimum twoyear results of revision total knee arthroplasty following infectious or non-infectious causes // Knee Surg Relat Res. 2012;24:227–234.

44.

45. Liow M. H. L., Xia Z., Wong M. K., Tay K. J., Yeo S. J., Chin P. L. Robot-assisted total knee arthroplasty accurately restores the joint line and mechanical axis. A prospective randomised study // J Arthroplast. 2014;29:2373–2377.

46.

47. Bellemans J. Restoring the joint line in revision TKA: does it matter? // Knee. 2004;11:3–5.

48.

49. Iacono F., Lo Presti M., Bruni D. et al. The adductor tubercle: a reliable landmark for analysing the level of the femorotibial joint line // Knee Surg Sport Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21:2725–2729.

50.

51. Porteous A. J., Hassaballa M. A., Newman J. H. Does the joint line matter in revision total knee replacement? // J Bone Jt Surg Br. 2008;90:879–884. 28. Freisinger G. M., Hutter E. E., Lewis J. et al. Relationships between varus-valgus laxity of the severely osteoarthritic knee and gait, instability, clinical performance, and function // J Orthop Res. 2017;35:1644–1652.

52.

53. Luyckx T., Beckers L., Colyn W., Vandenneucker H., Bellemans J. The adductor ratio: a new tool for joint line reconstruction in revision TKA // Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22:3028–3033.