@article{NedopilDhaliwalHowelletal.2022,
  author    = {Nedopil, Alexander J. and Dhaliwal, Anand and Howell, Stephen M. and Hull, Maury L.},
  title     = {A surgeon that switched to unrestricted kinematic alignment with manual instruments has a short learning curve and comparable resection accuracy and outcomes to those of an experienced surgeon},
  series = {Journal of Personalized Medicine},
  volume    = {12},
  journal   = {Journal of Personalized Medicine},
  number    = {7},
  issn      = {2075-4426},
  doi       = {10.3390/jpm12071152},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-281842},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {After starting an orthopedic practice, a surgeon with a fellowship in mechanically aligned (MA) TKA initiated this study to characterize their learning curve after they switched to unrestricted kinematic alignment (KA) TKA using manual instruments. Accordingly, the present study determined for the inexperienced (IE) surgeon the number of cases required to achieve consistent femoral resections and operating times, and whether the femoral resection accuracy, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and component alignment were different from an experienced (E) surgeon. This prospective cohort study analyzed the IE surgeon's first 30 TKAs, all performed with KA, and 30 consecutive KA TKAs performed by an E surgeon. The resection accuracy or deviation was the calipered thickness of the distal and posterior medial and lateral femoral resections minus the planned resection thickness, which was the thickness of the corresponding condyle of the femoral component, minus 2 mm for cartilage wear, and 1 mm for the kerf of the blade. Independent observers recorded the femoral resection thickness, operative times, PROMs, and alignment. For each femoral resection, the deviation between three groups of patients containing ten consecutive KA TKAs, was either insignificant (p = 0.695 to 1.000) or within the 0.5 mm resolution of the caliper, which indicated no learning curve. More than three groups were needed to determine the learning curve for the operative time; however, the IE surgeon's procedure dropped to 77 min for the last 10 patients, which was 20 min longer than the E surgeon. The resection deviations of the IE and E surgeon were comparable, except for the posterolateral femoral resection, which the IE surgeon under-resected by a mean of -0.8 mm (p < 0.0001). At a mean follow-up of 9 and 17 months, the Forgotten Joint Score, Oxford Knee Score, KOOS, and the alignment of the components and limbs were not different between the IE and E surgeon (p ≥ 0.6994). A surgeon that switches to unrestricted KA with manual instruments can determine their learning curve by computing the deviation of the distal and posterior femoral resections from the planned resection. Based on the present study, an IE surgeon could have resection accuracy, post-operative patient outcomes, and component alignment comparable to an E surgeon.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{DhaliwalZamoraNedopiletal.2022,
  author    = {Dhaliwal, Anand and Zamora, Tomas and Nedopil, Alexander J. and Howell, Stephen M. and Hull, Maury L.},
  title     = {Six commonly used postoperative radiographic alignment parameters do not predict clinical outcome scores after unrestricted caliper-verified kinematically aligned TKA},
  series = {Journal of Personalized Medicine},
  volume    = {12},
  journal   = {Journal of Personalized Medicine},
  number    = {9},
  issn      = {2075-4426},
  doi       = {10.3390/jpm12091468},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-288186},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Background: Unrestricted caliper-verified kinematically aligned (KA) TKA restores patient's prearthritic coronal and sagittal alignments, which have a wide range containing outliers that concern the surgeon practicing mechanical alignment (MA). Therefore, knowing which radiographic parameters are associated with dissatisfaction could help a surgeon decide whether to rely on them as criteria for revising an unhappy patient with a primary KA TKA using MA principles. Hence, we determined whether the femoral mechanical angle (FMA), hip-knee-ankle angle (HKAA), tibial mechanical angle (TMA), tibial slope angle (TSA), and the indicators of patellofemoral tracking, including patella tilt angle (PTA) and the lateral undercoverage of the trochlear resection (LUCTR), are associated with clinical outcome scores. Methods: Forty-three patients with a CT scan and skyline radiograph after a KA TKA with PCL retention and medial stabilized design were analyzed. Linear regression determined the strength of the association between the FMA, HKA angle, PTS, PTA, and LUCTR and the forgotten joint score (FJS), Oxford knee score (OKS), and KOOS Jr score obtained at a mean of 23 months. Results: There was no correlation between the FMA (range 2° varus to -10° valgus), HKAA (range 10° varus to -9° valgus), TMA (range 10° varus to -0° valgus), TSA (range 14° posterior to -4° anterior), PTA (range, -10° medial to 14° lateral), and the LUCTR resection (range 2 to 9 mm) and the FJS (median 83), the OKS (median 44), and the KOOS Jr (median 85) (r = 0.000 to 0.079). Conclusions: Surgeons should be cautious about using postoperative FMA, HKAA, TMA, TSA, PTA, and LUCTR values within the present study's reported ranges to explain success and dissatisfaction after KA TKA.},
  language  = {en}
}