
==== Front
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery
0936-8051
1434-3916
Springer Berlin Heidelberg Berlin/Heidelberg

38987503
5409
10.1007/s00402-024-05409-z
Knee Arthroplasty
Reconstruction of mechanical leg axis using non-modular cemented hinged prosthesis in complex primary total knee arthroplasty
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1269-6231
Jacob Benjamin b.jacob@waldkliniken-eisenberg.de

1
Jacob Nadja 1
Röhner Eric 2
Wassilew Georgi 3
Matziolis Georg 1
Heinecke Markus 1
1 https://ror.org/0030f2a11 grid.411668.c 0000 0000 9935 6525 Orthopaedic Department Waldkliniken Eisenberg, University Hospital Jena, Campus Eisenberg, Eisenberg, Germany
2 Orthopaedic Department of the Heinrich-Braun-Hospital Zwickau, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607 Eisenberg, Germany
3 grid.412469.c 0000 0000 9116 8976 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
11 7 2024
11 7 2024
2024
144 8 36073613
8 4 2024
18 6 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Purpose

Modular cementless knee arthroplasty systems are capable of precise reconstruction of the mechanical axis. However, they are considered more susceptible to complications. In contrast, non-modular cemented systems are said to be more forgiving and show good long-term results. The aim of this study was to investigate the resulting leg axis after implantation of a non-modular cemented rotating hinged knee prosthesis. Furthermore, potential risk factors for the occurrence of malalignment and complications should be identified.

Methods

Between 2005 and 2015, 115 patients could be included in this monocentric retrospective cohort study. All patients underwent primary hinged non-modular cemented total knee arthroplasty. Preoperative and postoperative standardized long radiographs were analysed to determine resulting leg axis. Furthermore, epidemiological and intraoperative data as well as perioperative complications were surveyed.

Results

Average leg axis was 5.8° varus preoperatively and 0.6° valgus postoperatively. Considering an axis deviation of 3° as the target corridor, 27% of all cases examined were outside the desired range. 21% cases showed a femoral deviation from the target corridor and 15% showed a tibial deviation. There was a significant relationship between the preoperative mLDFA and the mechanical alignment of the femoral component (R = 0.396, p < 0.001) as well as between the preoperative mMPTA and the mechanical alignment of the tibial component (R = 0.187, p = 0.045). The mean operative duration was 96 min. No periprosthetic fractures were observed within the study cohort.

Conclusion

The main result of the present work is that a non-modular cemented rotating hinged knee arthroplasty system can reconstruct the mechanical leg axis precisely and comparable to modular cementless and unconstrained total knee prostheses. Component malalignment is primarily dependent upon extraarticular deformity preoperatively. Periprosthetic fracture rates and duration of surgery were lower compared with current literature.

Level of evidence

Level III: Retrospective cohort study.

Keywords

Knee arthroplasty
Modularity
Mechanical axis
Rotating hinged knee
Periprosthetic fracture
issue-copyright-statement© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

The use of hinged systems in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains infrequent, numbering 0.2–2.8% in major national arthroplasty registries [2, 27, 30, 31]. Complication rates in the range of 9.2–63% and 10-year survivorship of 51–92.5% were reported [5]. However, if considering the selection bias in publications where rotating hinged knees (RHK) are merely used in disastrous cases as “salvage” implants, recent studies have confirmed reasonable survival rates and function [1, 8, 9, 16, 18, 21]. Nevertheless, indications for a RHK in a primary setting should be limited to collateral ligament insufficiency, severe varus or valgus deformity (> 20°), extensive flexion–extension gap imbalance, ankylosis and hyperlaxity [13].

In recent years modular cementless knee arthroplasty systems are becoming increasingly popular due to their ability to address individual anatomy, allowing precise reconstruction of the mechanical axis [30]. However, relevant complications (i.e. periprosthetic fractures, postoperative implant migration, end-of-stem pain) have been reported [10, 11, 19, 26]. Furthermore, fully integrated coated implants can be challenging to revise.

In contrast, cemented non-modular systems are simpler to implant due to their lack of complexity. While this often results in the stem not being able to be implanted parallel to the tibial or femoral diaphysis, this can be compensated for by the cement mantle to a certain amount.

In this work, the resulting leg axis after primary hinged non-modular cemented total knee arthroplasty was investigated. Furthermore, potential risk factors for the occurrence of a malalignment and periprosthetic fractures were identified. We hypothesized that reconstruction of the mechanical leg axis is precisely possible and that modularity is unnecessary for the majority of cases.

Materials and methods

This is a monocentric retrospective cohort study. It was approved by the local ethics committee (2023–3183). Resulting from the retrospective and anonymized study design, an informed consent was not necessary according to the ethics committee approval. All methods were carried out in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations based on the approval. Between 2005 and 2015 all patients receiving a primary non-modular cemented rotating hinged knee arthroplasty (Endo Model, Waldemar Link, Hamburg, Germany) for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee were included (Fig. 1a–d). Indications for using a primary RHK were severe varus or valgus deformity (> 20°), extensive flexion–extension gap imbalance, ankylosis and hyperlaxity. Exclusion criteria were revision cases.Fig. 1 Box plot of preoperative and postoperative mechanical leg axis [°]

Epidemiological data (sex, age, BMI), intraoperative data (duration of surgery, side) and perioperative complications (periprosthetic fractures) were registered. Radiographic data was collected pre- and postoperatively before discharge (five days after surgery) by two independent blinded evaluators. The leg axis was determined on standardized whole leg standing radiographs. The amount of preoperative instability was measured as the joint line convergence angle (JLCA) between the tangent line of the femoral condyle and the tibial plateau. After DICOM files were imported to ImageJ (https://imagej.nih.gov/ij) angles were calculated based on the following points, which were registered consecutively: hip centre, knee centre, ankle centre, lateral and medial femoral condyle, lateral and medial tibial plateau [14]. All points were registered with an accuracy better than 1 mm. The angles were calculated (Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Corporation, Redmont, Washington, USA) using standard trigonometry, so that the resulting values should have an accuracy better than 1°. The inaccuracy of long standing radiographs regarding rotation and flexion of the leg was addressed by performing the radiographs in a standardized manner. The radiographs were taken in full extension or max. 5° of flexion and immediately checked for correct rotation and repeated if necessary. Correct rotation was defined as central projection of the femoral trochlea in reference to the condyles of the femoral implant.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS (Ver. 24, IBM). After testing for normal distribution using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov–test all data are given as mean values ± standard deviation. The Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated for the preoperative mLDFA and mMPTA and the postoperative alignment of the femoral and tibial component. For all tests a p-value of < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.”

Results

Over 11 years, 115 patients were included in the study (41 male, 74 female). Medium age at time of surgery was 68.5 years, average BMI 30.4 kg/m2 (Table 1). Mean duration of surgical intervention was 96 min (Table 1). No periprosthetic fractures were detected neither intraoperatively nor postoperatively until discharge.Table 1 Epidemiological, intraoperative and radiographic data

Epidemiological data	
Number	115	
Male	41	
Female	74	
Age (years)	68.5 ± 11	
BMI (kg/m2)	30.4 ± 6	
Intraoperative data	
Duration of surgery (min.)	96 ± 41	
Right side (cases)	62/115	
Left side (cases)	53/115	
Periprosthetic fractures	0/115	
Radiographic data—preoperative		
Mechanical leg axis	5.80° varus	
Instability (JLCA)	8.02° varus	
Radiographic data—postoperative	
Mechanical leg axis	0.55° valgus	
Deviation	2.5° ± 2.1°	
 > 3° target corridor (cases)	31/115	
	 11/115 varus	
	 20/115 valgus	
	 24/115 femoral	
	 17/115 tibial	

The average preoperative leg axis was 5.8° varus with instability (JLCA) of 8.0° varus (Table 1, Figs. 2 and 3). The average postoperative leg axis was 0.6° valgus with deviation from the mechanical axis of 2.5° ± 2.1° (0°–10.3°) (Figs. 2, 3, 4). Considering three degrees of deviation as the target corridor, 27% of all cases examined were outside the desired range (31/115; 11 varus, 20 valgus) (Fig. 4). Femoral deviation from the target corridor was seen in 21% (24/115) and tibial deviation in 15% (17/115) of all cases observed (Table 1).Fig. 2 Bar chart of preoperative mechanical leg axis [°]

Fig. 3 Bar chart of postoperative mechanical leg axis [°]

Fig. 4 Images a AP preoperative long radiograph of osteoarthritis of the knee with varus deformity. b AP postoperative long radiograph after arthroplasty of a RHK. c AP preoperative long radiograph of osteoarthritis of the knee with valgus deformity. d AP postoperative long radiograph after arthroplasty of a RHK

We calculated a significant relationship between the mLDFA and the mechanical alignment of the femoral component (R = 0.396; p < 0.001) as well as the mMPTA and the mechanical alignment of the tibial component (R = 0.187; p = 0.045), i.e. the preoperative femoral/tibial deformity or extraarticular defect leads to a postoperative component malpositioning in the same direction.

Discussion

The main result of the present work is that a non-modular cemented rotating hinged system can reconstruct the mechanical leg axis to the same extent as modular systems or conventionally instrumented unconstrained total knee prostheses. To our knowledge this is the first study to examine mechanical leg alignment after primary RHK in such a large cohort.

In our study 27% of all cases examined were outside the 3° target corridor. Cheng et al., Mason et al. and Fu et al. reported outliers of 28.3%, 31.8 and 28.7% in their meta-analyses considering conventional total knee arthroplasty [7, 12, 20].

Our surveyed group exhibited a mean absolute coronar deviation from the neutral mechanical leg axis of 2.5° ± 2.1° postoperatively. These results are comparable to those of Ochs et al. who reported a deviation of 2.7° ± 1.1° postoperatively for primarily implanted hinged arthroplasties. They were using computer-assisted navigation along with a modular rotating-hinge knee arthroplasty system (EndoRo, Aesculap AG, Tuttlingen, Germany) and cementless stem fixation in some of their patients [22]. Boelch et al. compared RHK designs (Link Endo-Model SL vs. EnduRo) for revision knee arthroplasty in patients with gross ligament instability and concluded that “the Endo-Model yielded straighter legs” [4]. The authors tried to attribute their results to the significantly longer cemented stems of this specific non-modular implant.

Stem fixation techniques are controversially discussed in the literature. While some authors published comparable survivorship of cementless press-fit stems, others reported increased micromotion and higher incidence of end-of-stem pain [10, 11, 29]. Additionally cemented stems allow more variability of component positioning without modularity. This prevents lateral oversizing and gives the possibility to reconstruct mechanical leg axis precisely even when an implantation not parallel to the tibial or femoral diaphysis is required (i.e. moderate extraarticular deformities). With cementless press-fit stems this can only be achieved by off-set adapters which increase the complexity of the implantation [3]. Moreover, fully integrated coated stems are more difficult to revise.

Another result of our study was that component positioning primarily depends on preoperative intraarticular defect or extraarticular deformity given by mMPTA and mLDFA. John et al. presented three main concepts for managing complex knee deformities: 1. Primary TKA with symmetric or asymmetric bone resection, 2. Single-stage simultaneous corrective osteotomy and TKA, 3. Two-stage corrective osteotomy followed by delayed TKA [17]. However, most authors recommend intraarticular correction instead of simultaneous TKA and osteotomy due to technical difficulties and various complications (e.g. nonunion, stiffness, infection, fractures) [23]. Large extraarticular deformities cannot be addressed sufficiently using a non-modular arthroplasty system. The question arises as to whether reconstruction of the exact mechanical axis is absolutely necessary or whether a moderate deviation from neutral mechanical alignment can be accepted in hinged implants [25, 28]. However, recent developments in robotics and navigated knee arthroplasty offer the possibility to visualize implant positioning in real time intraoperatively. Extraarticular deformities can thus be addressed immediately by switching to a modular implant. Conclusions resulting from mMPTA and mLDFA measurements should take into account, that both values are resulting from intraarticular bone defects and extraarticular deformities, so that they might be pathologic even in cases without extraarticular deformity.

Both the incidence of periprosthetic fractures and the duration of surgical intervention were lower compared with the current literature, arguably due to the simplicity of the non-modular cementless system [19, 26]. Caron et al. determined 3% of periprosthetic fractures in their multicenter study of non-tumoral hinged knee arthroplasty [6]. Schnetz et al. reported 6% of periprosthetic fracture using modular cementless implants. Pour et al. and Hernandez-Vaquero who also investigated outcomes of modular systems identified rates of periprosthetic fractures of 2.3% and 3.8% [15, 24].

This study has several limitations. First it is an observational study, so that confounders cannot be controlled. There was no control group with cementless modular implants, so that fracture rates and operative time can only be compared with literature. Although the pre- and postoperative radiographs were performed in a standardized manner, projection errors by rotation of the leg and knee flexion limit the accuracy of the radiographic measurements.

Conclusions

The main result of the present work is that a non-modular cemented rotating hinged knee arthroplasty system can reconstruct the mechanical leg axis precisely and comparable to modular cementless and conventional primary total knee arthroplasties. Potential malalignment is primarily dependent upon extraarticular deformity preoperatively. Based on these results we propose the use of either cemented or cementless modular implants with offset stem options in case of pathological mMPTA or mLDFA preoperatively. Periprosthetic fracture rates and duration of surgery were lower compared with current literature.

Abbreviations

TKA Total Knee Arthroplasty

RHK Rotating Hinged Knee

ROM Range Of Motion

mLDFA Mechanical Lateral Distal Femoral Angle

mMPTA Mechanical Medial Proximal Tibial Angle

resp. Respectively

i.e. Id est

e.g. Exempli gratia

etc. Et cetera

DICOM Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine

BMI Body Mass Index

JLCA Joint Line Convergent Angle

Author contributions

GM, ER and GW designed this study. NJ collected the data. BJ, MH and GM prepared the draft of the manuscript. All authors helped prepare the results and discussion in the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

There is no funding source.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests. The authors have no proprietary, financial, professional or other personal interests.

Ethical approval

Approved by the ethics committee of the University Jena (2023–3183).

Informed consent

Not necessary according to the ethics committee approval.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Abdulkarim A Keane A Hu SY Glen L Murphy DJ Rotating-hinge knee prosthesis as a viable option in primary surgery: literature review & meta-analysis Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2019 105 7 1351 1359 10.1016/j.otsr.2019.08.012 31588033
Abdulkarim A, Keane A, Hu SY, Glen L, Murphy DJ (2019) Rotating-hinge knee prosthesis as a viable option in primary surgery: literature review & meta-analysis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 105(7):1351–135931588033
2. Achakri H, Bridgens J, Brittain R, Howard P, Wilkinson M, Wilton T, Dawson-Bowling S, Esler C, Goldberg A, Hamoodi Z, Jameson S, Toms A, Watts A, Young E, Boulton C, Taylor D, Espinoza O, Mccormack V, Newell C, Royall M, Swanson M, Ben-Shlomo Y, Blom A, Clark E, Deere K, Evans J, Gregson C, Jones T, Judge A, Lenguerrand E, Marques E, Porter M, Price A, Rees J, Sayers A, Whitehouse M NJR statistical analysis, support and associated services.
3. Beckmann J Lüring C Springorum R Köck FX Grifka J Tingart M Fixation of revision TKA: a review of the literature Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011 19 6 872 879 10.1007/s00167-010-1249-3 20821191
Beckmann J, Lüring C, Springorum R, Köck FX, Grifka J, Tingart M (2011) Fixation of revision TKA: a review of the literature. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(6):872–87920821191
4. Boelch SP Arnholdt J Holzapfel BM Jakuscheit A Rudert M Hoberg M Revision knee arthroplasty with rotating hinge systems in patients with gross ligament instability Int Orthop 2018 42 12 2825 2833 10.1007/s00264-018-3982-z 29789904
Boelch SP, Arnholdt J, Holzapfel BM, Jakuscheit A, Rudert M, Hoberg M (2018) Revision knee arthroplasty with rotating hinge systems in patients with gross ligament instability. Int Orthop 42(12):2825–283329789904
5. Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán E Total knee arthroplasty using hinge joints: indications and results EFORT Open Rev 2019 4 4 121 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180056 31057949
Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán E (2019) Total knee arthroplasty using hinge joints: indications and results. EFORT Open Rev 4(4):12131057949
6. Caron É Gabrion A Ehlinger M Verdier N Rubens-Duval B Neri T Martz P Putman S Pasquier G Complications and failures of non-tumoral hinged total knee arthroplasty in primary and aseptic revision surgery: a review of 290 cases Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2021 107 3 102875 10.1016/j.otsr.2021.102875 33652151
Caron É, Gabrion A, Ehlinger M, Verdier N, Rubens-Duval B, Neri T, Martz P, Putman S, Pasquier G (2021) Complications and failures of non-tumoral hinged total knee arthroplasty in primary and aseptic revision surgery: a review of 290 cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 107(3):10287533652151
7. Cheng T Zhao S Peng X Zhang X Does computer-assisted surgery improve postoperative leg alignment and implant positioning following total knee arthroplasty? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011 20 7 1307 1322 10.1007/s00167-011-1588-8 21732057
Cheng T, Zhao S, Peng X, Zhang X (2011) Does computer-assisted surgery improve postoperative leg alignment and implant positioning following total knee arthroplasty? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(7):1307–132221732057
8. Cottino U Abdel MP Perry KI Mara KC Lewallen DG Hanssen AD Long-term results after total knee arthroplasty with contemporary rotating-hinge prostheses J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017 99 4 324 330 10.2106/JBJS.16.00307 28196034
Cottino U, Abdel MP, Perry KI, Mara KC, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD (2017) Long-term results after total knee arthroplasty with contemporary rotating-hinge prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99(4):324–33028196034
9. Dauwe J Vandekerckhove B Bouttelgier R Holzer LA Dauwe D Vandenneucker H Patient-reported outcomes after primary rotating hinge total knee arthroplasty: a multi-centre clinical cohort study Int Orthop 2021 45 11 2893 2897 10.1007/s00264-021-05162-7 34324043
Dauwe J, Vandekerckhove B, Bouttelgier R, Holzer LA, Dauwe D, Vandenneucker H (2021) Patient-reported outcomes after primary rotating hinge total knee arthroplasty: a multi-centre clinical cohort study. Int Orthop 45(11):2893–289734324043
10. El-Zayat BF Heyse TJ Fanciullacci N Labey L Fuchs-Winkelmann S Innocenti B Fixation techniques and stem dimensions in hinged total knee arthroplasty: a finite element study Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2016 136 12 1741 1752 10.1007/s00402-016-2571-0 27704204
El-Zayat BF, Heyse TJ, Fanciullacci N, Labey L, Fuchs-Winkelmann S, Innocenti B (2016) Fixation techniques and stem dimensions in hinged total knee arthroplasty: a finite element study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136(12):1741–175227704204
11. Ettinger M Savov P Windhagen H Bühren V Hungerer S End-of-stem pain in hip and knee arthroplasty Orthopade 2021 50 1 51 59 10.1007/s00132-019-03837-z 31696261
Ettinger M, Savov P, Windhagen H, Bühren V, Hungerer S (2021) End-of-stem pain in hip and knee arthroplasty. Orthopade 50(1):51–5931696261
12. Fu Y Wang M Liu Y Fu Q Alignment outcomes in navigated total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012 20 6 1075 1082 10.1007/s00167-011-1695-6 22002300
Fu Y, Wang M, Liu Y, Fu Q (2012) Alignment outcomes in navigated total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(6):1075–108222002300
13. Gehrke T Kendoff D Haasper C The role of hinges in primary total knee replacement Bone Joint J 2014 96B 11 93 95 10.1302/0301-620X.96B11.34143
Gehrke T, Kendoff D, Haasper C (2014) The role of hinges in primary total knee replacement. Bone Joint J 96B(11):93–95
14. Govsa F Chatzioglou GN Hepguler S Pinar Y Bedre O Variable lower limb alignment of clinical measures with digital photographs and the Footscan pressure system J Sport Rehabil 2020 30 3 437 444 10.1123/jsr.2018-0283 33075751
Govsa F, Chatzioglou GN, Hepguler S, Pinar Y, Bedre O (2020) Variable lower limb alignment of clinical measures with digital photographs and the Footscan pressure system. J Sport Rehabil 30(3):437–44433075751
15. Hernández-Vaquero D Sandoval-García MA Hinged total knee arthroplasty in the presence of ligamentous deficiency Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010 468 5 1248 10.1007/s11999-009-1226-7 20087700
Hernández-Vaquero D, Sandoval-García MA (2010) Hinged total knee arthroplasty in the presence of ligamentous deficiency. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(5):124820087700
16. von Hintze J Niemeläinen M Sintonen H Nieminen J Eskelinen A Good mid-term outcome of the rotating hinge knee in primary total knee arthroplasty—results of a single center cohort of 106 knees with a median follow-up of 6.3 years Knee 2021 28 273 281 10.1016/j.knee.2020.12.016 33453516
von Hintze J, Niemeläinen M, Sintonen H, Nieminen J, Eskelinen A (2021) Good mid-term outcome of the rotating hinge knee in primary total knee arthroplasty—results of a single center cohort of 106 knees with a median follow-up of 6.3 years. Knee 28:273–28133453516
17. John R Sherman K Sharma H Surgical principles for complex primary total knee arthroplasty in the presence of extra-articular deformity J Orthop 2022 34 295 303 10.1016/j.jor.2022.08.017 36164287
John R, Sherman K, Sharma H (2022) Surgical principles for complex primary total knee arthroplasty in the presence of extra-articular deformity. J Orthop 34:295–30336164287
18. Kendoff D Haasper C Gehrke T Klauser W Sandiford N Management of gonarthrosis with a rotating hinge prosthesis: minimum 10-year follow-up Clin Orthop Surg 2020 12 4 464 469 10.4055/cios19153 33274023
Kendoff D, Haasper C, Gehrke T, Klauser W, Sandiford N (2020) Management of gonarthrosis with a rotating hinge prosthesis: minimum 10-year follow-up. Clin Orthop Surg 12(4):464–46933274023
19. Konan S Sandiford N Unno F Masri BS Garbuz DS Duncan CP Periprosthetic fractures associated with total knee arthroplasty: an update Bone Joint J 2016 98 11 1489 1496 10.1302/0301-620X.98B11.BJJ-2016-0029.R1 27803224
Konan S, Sandiford N, Unno F, Masri BS, Garbuz DS, Duncan CP (2016) Periprosthetic fractures associated with total knee arthroplasty: an update. Bone Joint J 98(11):1489–149627803224
20. Mason JB Fehring TK Estok R Banel D Fahrbach K Meta-analysis of alignment outcomes in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty surgery J Arthroplasty 2007 22 8 1097 1106 10.1016/j.arth.2007.08.001 18078876
Mason JB, Fehring TK, Estok R, Banel D, Fahrbach K (2007) Meta-analysis of alignment outcomes in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty 22(8):1097–110618078876
21. Neri T Boyer B Papin PE Martz P Vaz G Eichler D Ehlinger M Pasquier G Contemporary rotating hinge arthroplasty can safely be recommended in complex primary surgery Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2020 28 6 1780 1788 10.1007/s00167-019-05589-x 31263928
Neri T, Boyer B, Papin PE, Martz P, Vaz G, Eichler D, Ehlinger M, Pasquier G (2020) Contemporary rotating hinge arthroplasty can safely be recommended in complex primary surgery. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(6):1780–178831263928
22. Ochs BG Schreiner AJ de Zwart PM Stöckle U Gonser CE Computer-assisted navigation is beneficial both in primary and revision surgery with modular rotating-hinge knee arthroplasty Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016 24 1 64 73 10.1007/s00167-014-3316-7 25239506
Ochs BG, Schreiner AJ, de Zwart PM, Stöckle U, Gonser CE (2016) Computer-assisted navigation is beneficial both in primary and revision surgery with modular rotating-hinge knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24(1):64–7325239506
23. Pietsch M Hochegger M Djahani O Mlaker G Eder-Halbedl M Hofstädter T Handheld computer-navigated constrained total knee arthroplasty for complex extra-articular deformities Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2021 141 12 2245 2254 10.1007/s00402-021-04053-1 34255171
Pietsch M, Hochegger M, Djahani O, Mlaker G, Eder-Halbedl M, Hofstädter T (2021) Handheld computer-navigated constrained total knee arthroplasty for complex extra-articular deformities. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 141(12):2245–225434255171
24. Pour AE Parvizi J Slenker N Purtill JJ Sharkey PF Rotating hinged total knee replacement: use with caution J Bone Joint Surg 2007 89 8 1735 1741 17671012
Pour AE, Parvizi J, Slenker N, Purtill JJ, Sharkey PF (2007) Rotating hinged total knee replacement: use with caution. J Bone Joint Surg 89(8):1735–174117671012
25. Pujol O Joshi-Jubert N Altayó M Lara Y Reverté-Vinaixa M Pijoan J Castellet E Minguell J Preoperative mechanical axis has no influence on reoperation rate in primary rotating-hinge knee arthroplasty J Orthop 2022 34 364 367 10.1016/j.jor.2022.09.020 36238960
Pujol O, Joshi-Jubert N, Altayó M, Lara Y, Reverté-Vinaixa M, Pijoan J, Castellet E, Minguell J (2022) Preoperative mechanical axis has no influence on reoperation rate in primary rotating-hinge knee arthroplasty. J Orthop 34:364–36736238960
26. Della Rocca GJ Periprosthetic fractures about the knee—an overview J Knee Surg 2013 26 1 3 8 10.1055/s-0033-1333900 23393053
Della Rocca GJ (2013) Periprosthetic fractures about the knee—an overview. J Knee Surg 26(1):3–823393053
27. Smith PN GDMMMCSJVCWCCSPRCADPHDHCLMCKLPL (2023) Hip, Knee and Shoulder Arthroplasty: 2023 Annual Report, Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry, AOA: Adelaide, South Australia. 2023.
28. Stucinskas J Robertsson O Sirka A Lebedev A Wingstrand H Tarasevicius S Moderate varus/valgus malalignment after total knee arthroplasty has little effect on knee function or muscle strength Acta Orthop 2015 86 6 728 733 10.3109/17453674.2015.1059689 26058850
Stucinskas J, Robertsson O, Sirka A, Lebedev A, Wingstrand H, Tarasevicius S (2015) Moderate varus/valgus malalignment after total knee arthroplasty has little effect on knee function or muscle strength. Acta Orthop 86(6):728–73326058850
29. Wood GC Naudie DDR MacDonald SJ McCalden RW Bourne RB Results of press-fit stems in revision knee Arthroplasties Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009 467 3 810 817 10.1007/s11999-008-0621-9 19034597
Wood GC, Naudie DDR, MacDonald SJ, McCalden RW, Bourne RB (2009) Results of press-fit stems in revision knee Arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(3):810–81719034597
30. (2022) The ninth annual report of the AJRR on hip and knee arthroplasty.
31. The German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD). 10.36186/reporteprd072023
