Ten Flaws of Systematic Mechanical Alignment Total Knee Arthroplasty

Abstract

Mechanical alignment (MA) and its tenets have been considered essential for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) success since they were introduced in 1973. However, over time, there have been colossal advances in our knowledge and understanding of the anatomy and kinematics of the knee, as well as in surgical precision and implants. However, the MA systematic principles of prosthetic arthroplasty and implant position related to the lower-extremity mechanical axis, have only recently been called into question. The high rates of dissatisfaction and residual pain reported after MA TKA prompted this questioning, and that leaves plenty of room for improvement. Despite the general consensus that there is great variability between patients’ anatomy, it is still the norm to carry out a systematic operation that does not consider individual variations. Evolving to a more personalized arthroplasty surgery was proposed as a rational and reasonable option to improve patient outcomes. Transitioning to a personalized TKA approach requires questioning and even disregarding certain MA TKA principles. Based on current knowledge, we can state that certain principles are erroneous or unfounded. The aim of this narrative review was to discuss and challenge 10 previously accepted, yet we believe, flawed, principles of MA, and to present an alternative concept, which is rooted in personalized TKA techniques.