A prospective randomised controlled trial of mechanical axis with soft tissue release balancing vs functional alignment with bony resection balancing in total knee replacement-a study using Stryker Mako robotic arm-assisted technology

Simon W Young, Nina Zeng, Mei Lin Tay, David Fulker, Christina Esposito, Matthew Carter, Ali Bayan, Bill Farrington, Rupert Van Rooyen, Matthew Walker, Simon W Young, Nina Zeng, Mei Lin Tay, David Fulker, Christina Esposito, Matthew Carter, Ali Bayan, Bill Farrington, Rupert Van Rooyen, Matthew Walker

Abstract

Background: Improving the functional outcome following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) by using different alignment techniques remains controversial. The surgical techniques and technologies used so far to obtain these alignments have all suffered from inaccuracies. The use of robotic technology to plan and execute the bony resection provides increased accuracy for these various alignment techniques and may determine which will deliver superior function. Functional alignment (FA) is a newer surgical technique that aims to position the prosthesis with respect to each patients' specific bony anatomy whilst minimising disruption to the soft tissue envelope. This trial aims to compare the patient and surgical outcomes of FA to the current gold standard surgical technique, mechanical alignment (MA), under randomised and blinded conditions.

Methods: Patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis will be prospectively recruited. Following informed consent, 240 patients will be randomised to either a MA surgical technique (the control group) or a FA surgical technique (the intervention group) at a ratio of 4:1 using a random number generator. All patients will undergo computer tomography (CT) based robotic arm-assisted surgery to execute planned implant positioning and alignment with high levels of accuracy. The primary outcome is the forgotten joint score (FJS) at 2 years post-operation. Secondary outcome measures include patient reported outcome measures of post-operative rehabilitation, pain, function and satisfaction, as well as limb alignment, implant revisions and adverse events. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol population analysis will also be conducted. Standardisation of the surgical system and care pathways will minimise variation and assist in both patient and physiotherapist blinding. Ethical approval was obtained from the Northern B Health and Disability Ethics Committee (20/NTB/10).

Discussion: Currently, MA remains the gold standard in knee replacement due to proven outcomes and excellent long-term survivorship. There are many alternative alignment techniques in the literature, all with the goal of improving patient outcomes. This study is unique in that it leverages an advanced analytics tool to assist the surgeon in achieving balance. Both alignment techniques will be executed with high precision using the CT-based robotic arm-assisted surgery system which will minimise surgical variation. This trial design will help determine if FA delivers superior outcomes for patients.

Trial registration: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN12620000009910 . Registered on 9 January 2020.

Clinicaltrials: gov, NCT04600583 . Registered on 29 September 2020.

Keywords: Functional alignment; Mechanical alignment; Randomised controlled trial; Robotic surgery; Total knee arthroplasty.

Conflict of interest statement

SWY and MLW are paid consultants and receive research support from Stryker Orthopaedics and Smith + Nephew. BF is a paid consultant and provides medical education for Stryker Orthopaedics. DF, CE and MC are paid employees of Stryker Orthopaedics. The other authors declare no competing interests.

© 2022. The Author(s).

References

    1. Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KDJ. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(1):57–63. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9.
    1. Clement ND, Bardgett M, Weir D, Holland J, Gerrand C, Deehan DJ. Three groups of dissatisfied patients exist after total knee arthroplasty: Early, persistent, and late. Bone Jt J. 2018;100B(2):161–169. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B2.BJJ-2017-1016.R1.
    1. Nam D, Barrack RL. Patient dissatisfaction following total knee replacement. Bone Joint J. 2014;96(11 Supplement A):96–100. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B11.34152.
    1. Cherian J, Kapadia B, Banerjee S, Jauregui J, Issa K, Mont M. Mechanical, anatomical, and kinematic axis in TKA: concepts and practical applications. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2014;7(2):89–95. doi: 10.1007/s12178-014-9218-y.
    1. Jaffe WL, Dundon JM, Camus T. Alignment and balance methods in total knee arthroplasty Abstract. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2018;26(20):709–716. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-16-00428.
    1. Babazadeh S, Stoney JD, Lim K, Choong PFM. The relevance of ligament balancing in total knee arthroplasty: how important is it? A systematic review of the literature. Orthop Rev. 2009;1(2):e26. doi: 10.4081/or.2009.e26.
    1. 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 The Chitranjan Ranawat Award. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;470(1):45. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-1936-5.
    1. Evans JT, Walker RW, Evans JP, Blom AW, Sayers A, Whitehouse MR. How long does a knee replacement last? A systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and national registry reports with more than 15 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2019;393(10172):655–663. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32531-5.
    1. Freeman MAR, Swanson SAV, Todd RC. Total replacement of the knee using the Freeman-Swanson knee prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1973;94:153–170. doi: 10.1097/00003086-197307000-00020.
    1. Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;248:13–14. doi: 10.1097/00003086-198911000-00004.
    1. Bellemans J, Vandenneucker H, Van Lauwe J, Victor J. A new surgical technique for medial collateral ligament balancing: multiple needle puncturing. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25(7):1151–1156. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.03.007.
    1. Vanlommel L, Vanlommel J, Claes S, Bellemans J. Slight undercorrection following total knee arthroplasty results in superior clinical outcomes in varus knees. Knee Surgery, Sport Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(10):2325–2330. doi: 10.1007/s00167-013-2481-4.
    1. Macdessi SJ, Griffiths-Jones W, Harris IA, Bellemans J, Chen DB. Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification. Bone Joint J. 2021;103(2):329–337. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.103B2.BJJ-2020-1050.R1.
    1. Macdessi SJ, Wood JA, Diwan AD, Harris IA, Balance S. Surgeon defined assessment is a poor predictor of knee balance in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, multicenter study. Knee Surgery, Sport Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020;29(2):498–506. doi: 10.1007/s00167-020-05925-6.
    1. Macdessi SJ, Hons M, Gharaibeh MA, Ortho HS, Harris IA. How accurately can soft tissue balance be determined in total knee arthroplasty? J Arthroplasty. 2019;34(2):290–294.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.10.003.
    1. Eckhoff DG, Bach JM, Spitzer VM, Reinig KD, Bagur MM, Baldini TH, et al. Three-dimensional mechanics, kinematics, and morphology of the knee viewed in virtual reality. J Bone Jt Surg. 2005;87(Suppl 2):71–80.
    1. Howell SM, Howell SJ, Kuznik KT, Cohen J, Hull ML. Does a kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty restore function without failure regardless of alignment category? Knee Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(3):1000–1007. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2613-z.
    1. Woon JTK, Zeng ISL, Calliess T, Windhagen H, Ettinger M, Waterson HB, et al. Outcome of kinematic alignment using patient-specific instrumentation versus mechanical alignment in TKA: a meta-analysis and subgroup analysis of randomised trials. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2018;138(9):1293–1303. doi: 10.1007/s00402-018-2988-8.
    1. Rivière C, Vigdorchik JM, Vendittoli P-A. Mechanical alignment: the end of an era! Vol. 105, Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research: OTSR. 2019. pp. 1223–6.
    1. Oussedik S, Abdel MP, Victor J, Pagnano MW. Alignment in total knee arthroplasty: what’s in a name? Bone Joint J. 2020;102(3):276–279. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.102B3.BJJ-2019-1729.
    1. Sires JD, Wilson CJ. CT validation of intraoperative implant position and knee alignment as determined by the MAKO total knee arthroplasty system. J Knee Surg. 2021;34(10):1133–1137. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1701447.
    1. Sherman WF, Freiberger C. Use of fulcrum positioning as a balancing tool during total knee arthroplasty on a robotic platform. Arthroplast today. 2021;8:176–180. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2021.03.002.
    1. Batailler C, Fernandez A, Swan J, Servien E, Haddad FS, Catani F, et al. MAKO CT-based robotic arm-assisted system is a reliable procedure for total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sport Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020;29(11):3585–3598. doi: 10.1007/s00167-020-06283-z.
    1. Chang JS, Kayani B, Wallace C, Haddad FS. Functional alignment achieves soft tissue balance in total knee arthroplasty as measured with quantitative sensor-guided technology. Bone Joint J. 2021;103(1):507-514.
    1. Clark GW, Esposito CI, Wood D. Individualized functional knee alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a robotic-assisted technique. Tech Orthop. 2021. 10.1097/BTO.0000000000000567.
    1. Allom RJ, Wood JA, Chen DB, MacDessi SJ. Tibiofemoral dynamic stressed gap laxities correlate with compartment load measurements in robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Bone Jt Open. 2021;2(11):974–980. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.211.BJO-2021-0066.R1.
    1. MacDessi SJ, Harris IA, Wernecke G, Heath E, Lorimer M, Hooper T, MacDessi SJ, Harris IA, Wernecke G, Heath E, Lorimer M, Hooper T. Robotic-assisted surgery and kinematic alignment in total knee arthroplasty (RASKAL study). A registry-nested, multi-centre, 2 x 2 factorial randomised trial of clinical, functional, radiog. BMJ Open. 2022;12(6):e051088. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051088.
    1. Steer R, Tippett B, Khan RN, Collopy D, Clark G. A prospective randomised control trial comparing functional with mechanical axis alignment in total knee arthroplasty : study protocol for an investigator initiated trial. Trials. 2021;22(523):1–14.
    1. Kayani B, Konan S, Tahmassebi J, Oussedik S, Moriarty PD, Haddad FS. A prospective double-blinded randomised control trial comparing robotic arm-assisted functionally aligned total knee arthroplasty versus robotic arm-assisted mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty. Trials. 2020;21(194):1–10.
    1. Akagi M, Oh M, Nonaka T, Tsujimoto H, Asano T, Hamanishi C. An anteroposterior axis of the tibia for total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;420:213–219. doi: 10.1097/00003086-200403000-00030.
    1. McEwen P, Balendra G, Doma K. Medial and lateral gap laxity differential in computer-assisted kinematic total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J. 2019;101-B(3):331–9. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.101B3.BJJ-2018-0544.R1.
    1. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(1):63–69. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.80B1.0800063.
    1. 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 Arthroplast. 2012;27(3):430–436.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.06.035.
    1. Roos EM, Lohmander LS. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): from joint injury to osteoarthritis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1(1):64. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-1-64.
    1. Fransen M, Edmonds J. Reliability and validity of the EuroQol in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Rheumatology. 1999;38(9):807–813. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/38.9.807.
    1. Wewers ME, Lowe NK. A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena. Res Nurs Health. 1990;13(4):227–236. doi: 10.1002/nur.4770130405.
    1. Hamilton DF, Lane JV, Gaston P, Patton JT, Macdonald DJ, Simpson AHRW, et al. Assessing treatment outcomes using a single question: the net promoter score. Bone Jt Journalone Jt J. 2014;96-B(5):622–8. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B5.32434.
    1. Valeberg BT, Hovik LH, Gjeilo KH. Relationship between self-reported pain sensitivity and pain after total knee arthroplasty: a prospective study of 71 patients 8 weeks after a standardized fast-track program. J Pain Res. 2016;9:625–629. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S113258.
    1. Dobson F, Hinman RS, Roos EM, Abbott JH, Stratford P, Davis AM, et al. OARSI recommended performance-based tests to assess physical function in people diagnosed with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2013;21(8):1042–1052. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2013.05.002.
    1. Young SW, Walker ML, Bayan A, Briant-Evans T, Pavlou P, Farrington B. The Chitranjan S. Ranawat Award: No difference in 2-year functional outcomes using kinematic versus mechanical alignment in TKA: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475(1):9–20. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-4844-x.
    1. Ingelsrud LH, Roos EM, Terluin B, Gromov K, Husted H, Troelsen A. Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement. Acta Orthop. 2018;89(5):541–547. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2018.1480739.
    1. Orr MN, Klika AK, Gagnier JJ, Bhandari M, Piuzzi NS. A call for a standardized approach to reporting patient-reported outcome measures: clinical relevance ratio. JBJS. 2021;103(22):e91.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe