Logo of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (Br)
Quick search:        
          Advanced Search
Guest Access | Sign In
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume, Vol 90-B, Issue SUPP_I, 7.  
Copyright © 2008 by British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chauhan, S.
Right arrow Articles by Beaver, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Chauhan, S.
Right arrow Articles by Beaver, R.

British Orthopaedic Association

Birmingham, England: 17–19 September 2003

President: Professor Paul Gregg

FEMORAL COMPONENT ROTATION IN TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY. A COMPARISON OF TWO DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES

SK Chauhan; RG Scott; GW Clark; and RA Beaver

Royal Perth Hospital, Department of Elective Orthopaedics, Perth, Western Australia

This study was to assess the accuracy of fixed posterior condylar referencing cutting blocks to the accuracy of combined epicondylar/AP axis referencing in femoral component rotation using a computer navigation system.

Seventy-five consecutive patients undergoing TKRs were randomized into two groups. The first received femoral component rotation by a computerized method that combined the epicondylar axis and Whitesides AP axis measurements to determine rotation. The second group had a zero or three-degree posterior referencing external rotation block, depending on which was closest to the epicondylar axis. All patients underwent axial CT scans of the distal femur to determine component rotation around the surgical epicondylar axis.

Femoral component alignment with the combined method as compared to fixed posterior alignment guides is statistically improved (p=0.001). In the posterior referencing group 43% were correctly rotated to the epicondylar axis but another 43% were malrotated by 3 degrees or more. The mean malrotation was 1.72 degrees (range 0–5) In the combined group 82% were correctly rotated and 11% were malrotated by 3 degrees or more. The mean malrotation was 0.51 degrees (range 0–4).

Conclusion: A combined computerized method of using the surgical epicondylar axis and Whitesides AP axis produces superior results when aiming for neutral femoral component rotation. Fixed posterior referencing blocks will produce errors in malrotation in over 50% of cases.

The abstracts were prepared by Mr Tim Briggs. (Editoral Secretary 2003/4) Correspondence should be addressed to him at Lane Farm, Chapel Lane, Totternhoe, Dunstable, Bedfordshire LU6 2BZ, United Kingdom






(c) British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery All Rights Reserved
Registered charity no: 209299     Print ISSN: 0301-620X
Hip, Knee, Trauma, Upper limb, Foot & Ankle, Paediatrics, Oncology, Spine, Arthroplasty, General