ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2026
Are current total knee arthroplasty implants tested and approved for personalised alignment?
Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Robotic knee arthroplasty-an evidence-based, narrative assessment of the current state].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty: radiological precision, clinical outcomes, and benchmarks for emerging systems.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Empagliflozin Alleviates Osteoarthritis Progression by Attenuating Inflammation, Restoring Impaired Autophagy, and Ameliorating Chondrocyte Senescence.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Are current total knee arthroplasty implants tested and approved for personalised alignment?Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- Early tibial loosening in the Attune total knee arthroplasty system: a retrieval analysis of clinical, demographic, and implant-related factors.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- The Effect of Tibial and Femoral Component Coronal Alignment on Survivorship After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Scoping Review of the Literature.JB & JS open accessReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) traditionally aims for neutral mechanical alignment (MA) to ensure implant longevity. However, this approach ignores individual knee variations, potentially leading to soft-tissue imbalances and suboptimal functional outcomes. As an alternative, personalised alignment techniques (PAT) have emerged that aim to restore bony anatomy, potentially improve soft tissue balance and thus accelerate recovery. Despite promising short-term results, long-term outcomes and regulatory approval remain unclear. This study investigates the extent to which TKA systems from various manufacturers are approved for kinematic alignment and allowable deviations from neutral MA.
methodsTKA systems were identified using the 2020 Endoprosthesis Registry Germany (EPRD). Manufacturers were systematically contacted to determine if their implants were approved for deviations from neutral MA and the maximum permissible deviations. Follow-ups in 2021 and 2022 resulted in responses from 11 of 13 manufacturers, with an additional update in 2023 and 2025.
resultsSeven of twelve responding manufacturers either stated that their prostheses were not approved for MA deviations or did not specify details. Among the others, approval varied between implant systems. Two allowed deviations for specific implants without defined limits, while three specified allowable deviation ranges (Triathlon from Stryker with their Mako System 6° varus to 3° valgus; ATTUNE CR FB from Johnson & Johnson deviation 7° varus to 3° valgus°; ATTUNE PS FB and ATTUNE RP ± 3°; Primary system from Zimmer Biomet 0 ± 5° with their ROSA system). Revision systems universally restricted axis deviation due to mechanical constraints.
conclusionOnly a limited number of manufacturers have conducted rigorous testing of their systems for deviations from MA, and consequently, are able to specify limits to such deviations. Additionally, practical limitations arise from the complexity of PAT, patient-specific factors and prosthesis suitability. To safeguard patient safety and ensure implant longevity, manufacturers should systematically evaluate alignment deviations through standardised tests or computational simulations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.