Maintaining the Physiological Lateral Flexion Gap in the Kinematically Aligned TKA Does Not Compromise Clinical Outcomes at One-Year Follow-Up

Abstract

Background: Instability is a common cause of (total knee arthroplasty) TKA failure, which can be prevented by achieving proper gap balance during surgery. There is no consensus on the ideal gap balance in TKA, and different alignment philosophies result in varying soft-tissue tightness. Traditional TKA aims for symmetric compartment balance, while kinematic alignment (KA) restores anatomy and accepts asymmetric flexion gaps. This study evaluated the impact of these philosophies on the flexion gap balance and clinical outcomes. Methods: A retrospective review of 167 patients who received true or restricted KA robotic-assisted TKA with at least one year of follow-up was conducted. The groups were based on intraoperative flexion gap differences: symmetric (0–1 mm) (n = 94) and asymmetric (2–5 mm) (n = 73). Results: Preoperative demographics and postoperative clinical and functional scores were compared. Both groups were similar in demographics and preoperative scores. True KA alignment was more likely to result in an asymmetric flexion gap, while restricted KA produced symmetric gaps. Conclusions: The study found no adverse effects from the physiological asymmetric flexion gap, with clinical and functional outcomes comparable to symmetric gaps. A 5 mm difference between the medial and lateral gap width did not negatively impact the outcomes. True KA more frequently results in a physiological asymmetric flexion gap.

Keywords

• gap balancing
• flexion gap
• kinematic alignment
• total knee arthroplasty
• robotic-assisted
• MAKO