BACKGROUND: Seeing as there are many alignment strategies for total knee arthroplasty (TKA), we need to determine differences between them in a rigorous scientific way. Therefore, we sought to compare perioperative and postoperative functional outcomes in patients undergoing TKA for varus osteoarthritis with a mechanical alignment target vs a kinematic alignment target, both executed with the same implant and same technological guidance. METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients who underwent TKA using a mechanical alignment technique were 1:1 matched to 100 patients who underwent TKA using a kinematic alignment (KA) technique, using the same implant and robotic technology. Patient-reported outcomes were measured postoperatively at 1 and 2 years. Power analysis revealed 94 patients to detect a significant difference. RESULTS: Mean Visual Analog Scale scores were higher in the mechanical alignment group during the first 6 weeks (P = .04), but statistically similar at 1 year. Six-week Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey mental and physical components were statistically similar (P = .1). Patients did not differ in 6-week or 1-year knee range of motion (P > .43). Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement was significantly better in the KA group at 6 weeks, 1 year, and 2 years (P = .09). Forgotten Joint Score at 1 and 2 years postoperatively were significantly higher in the KA group (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing TKA with KA experienced less pain in 6 weeks after surgery, and higher Forgotten Joint Scores at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Alternative TKA alignment and balancing strategies should be considered to increase patient satisfaction.
BACKGROUND: Seeing as there are many alignment strategies for total knee arthroplasty (TKA), we need to determine differences between them in a rigorous scientific way. Therefore, we sought to compare perioperative and postoperative functional outcomes in patients undergoing TKA for varus osteoarthritis with a mechanical alignment target vs a kinematic alignment target, both executed with the same implant and same technological guidance. METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients who underwent TKA using a mechanical alignment technique were 1:1 matched to 100 patients who underwent TKA using a kinematic alignment (KA) technique, using the same implant and robotic technology. Patient-reported outcomes were measured postoperatively at 1 and 2 years. Power analysis revealed 94 patients to detect a significant difference. RESULTS: Mean Visual Analog Scale scores were higher in the mechanical alignment group during the first 6 weeks (P = .04), but statistically similar at 1 year. Six-week Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey mental and physical components were statistically similar (P = .1). Patients did not differ in 6-week or 1-year knee range of motion (P > .43). Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement was significantly better in the KA group at 6 weeks, 1 year, and 2 years (P = .09). Forgotten Joint Score at 1 and 2 years postoperatively were significantly higher in the KA group (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing TKA with KA experienced less pain in 6 weeks after surgery, and higher Forgotten Joint Scores at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Alternative TKA alignment and balancing strategies should be considered to increase patient satisfaction.