Evidence Hub

Measured resection, gap balancing, and force-sensor-guided total knee arthroplasty result in different femoral and tibial rotational alignment but similar combined knee rotation and clinical outcomes: a randomized controlled trial

J. Hernández-Hermoso, L. Nescolarde, Federico Yañez-Siller, J. Calle-García, R. Pérez-Andrés, Damian García-Perdomo

Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2026

60 participants

Abstract

Different alignment philosophies and balancing methods may alter femoral and tibial component rotation in distinct ways within the same knee. This study aimed to (1) determine which of three surgical techniques—measured resection (MR), gap balancing with computer-assisted surgery (GB-CAS), or a force-sensor soft-tissue balancing device (FS-STB)—most closely reproduces native femoral, tibial, and combined rotational alignment in mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and (2) assess whether differences in rotational alignment affect outcomes at 5 years postoperatively. A total of 60 patients undergoing primary mechanical alignment TKA were randomly assigned to one of three surgical approaches (n = 20 per group): MR, GB-CAS, or FS-STB. Blinded observers assessed the Knee Society Score (KSS), Western Ontario MacMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and hip–knee–ankle angle preoperatively and at the 5-year follow-up visit. Pre- and postoperative two-dimensional (2D)-computed tomography scans were used to measure femoral rotation (BFA), tibial rotation, and combined femur-tibia rotation (TE_PTCA and BC_PTCA). Statistical analyses included paired t-tests, one-way analysis of variance, and effect size calculations. Femoral rotation remained unchanged in the MR and GB-CAS groups, but decreased slightly (1° external rotation) in the FS-STB group (P = 0.010). Tibial rotation increased significantly in internal rotation in the GB-CAS and FS-STB groups (P <…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 60 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free