Strategies in Trauma and Limb Reconstruction

Register      Login

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 3 ( September-December, 2022 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Sagittal Plane Assessment in Deformity Correction Planning: The Sagittal Joint Line Angle

Talal B Abalkhail, Philip K McClure

Keywords : Deformity correction, Deformity planning, Knee, Range of motion, Sagittal mechanical axis, Soft tissue contractures

Citation Information : Abalkhail TB, McClure PK. Sagittal Plane Assessment in Deformity Correction Planning: The Sagittal Joint Line Angle. 2022; 17 (3):159-164.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1569

License: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

Published Online: 30-12-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: Evaluate the validity of a recent approach to calculate the knee flexion or extension contracture contributing to the overall sagittal deformity using the sagittal mechanical axis angle (SMAA) for the overall alignment assessment and sagittal joint line angle (SJLA) for soft tissue contribution. The methods of evaluating these angles and their clinical applications are discussed. Materials and methods: In total, 107 normal limbs met the criteria and were divided into two groups: skeletally mature and immature. Sagittal alignment was evaluated using the Bone Ninja iPad application, and the posterior distal femoral angle (PDFA), posterior proximal tibial angle (PPTA), SMAA and SJLA were recorded. Results: In skeletally immature patients, mean SJLA was 13.46° [standard deviation (SD), 4.55°], and in mature patients, it was 16.91° (SD, 2.948°). The PDFA and PPTA were consistent with previously published measurements. Conclusion: The SJLA method is a practical way to quantify the soft tissue contribution and degree of contracture. It can also be used for monitoring deterioration or improvement of knee range of motion during lengthening or physical therapy. Clinical significance: All patients in this study presented to our clinic with symptoms on the contralateral side. This, in addition to the retrospective nature, was a limitation in our study. We recommend a validity study to compare our SJLA method to the classic anterior cortical line angle (ACL) method in addition to an inter-observer and intra-observer reliability study for the SJLA. We also recommend a study on completely normal asymptomatic subjects to better standardise the angle measurements in skeletally immature patients at different ages.

  1. Graves ML. The value of preoperative planning. J Orthop Trauma 2013;27(Suppl 1): S30–S34. DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3182a52626.
  2. Atesok K, Galos D, Jazrawi LM, et al. Preoperative planning in orthopaedic surgery. Current practice and evolving applications. Bull Hosp Jt Dis (2013) 2015;73(4):257–268. PMID: 26630469.
  3. Tanzer M, Makhdom AM. Preoperative planning in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2016;24(4):220–230. DOI: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-14-00332.
  4. Okike K. Preoperative planning in fracture surgery: The end of colored pens and tracing paper?: Commentary on an article by Yanxi Chen, MD, PhD, et al.: “Computer-assisted virtual surgical technology versus three-dimensional printing technology in preoperative planning for displaced three and four-part fractures of the proximal end of the humerus.” J Bone Joint Surg Am 2018;100:e146.
  5. Eggli S, Pisan M, Müller ME. The value of preoperative planning for total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998;80(3):382–390. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.80b3.7764.
  6. Paley D, Herzenberg JE, Tetsworth K, et al. Deformity planning for frontal and sagittal plane corrective osteotomies. Orthop Clin North Am 1994;25(3):425–465. PMID: 8028886.
  7. Whitaker AT, Gesheff MG, Jauregui JJ, et al. Comparison of PACS and Bone Ninja mobile application for assessment of lower extremity limb length discrepancy and alignment. J Child Orthop 2016;10(5):439–443. DOI: 10.1007/s11832-016-0761-5.
  8. Westacott DJ, McArthur J, King RJ, et al. Assessment of cup orientation in hip resurfacing: A comparison of TraumaCad and computed tomography. J Orthop Surg Res 2013;8:8. DOI: 10.1186/1749-799X-8-8.
  9. Maderbacher G, Baier C, Springorum HR, et al. Lower limb anatomy and alignment affect natural tibiofemoral knee kinematics: A cadaveric investigation. J Arthroplasty 2016;31(9):2038–2042. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.02.049.
  10. Lindahl O, Movin A, Ringqvist I. Knee extension. Measurement of the isometric force in different positions of the knee-joint. Acta Orthop Scand 1969;40(1):79–85. DOI: 10.3109/17453676908989487.
  11. Palmu SA, Lohman M, Paukku RT, et al. Childhood femoral fracture can lead to premature knee-joint arthritis. 21-year follow-up results: A retrospective study. Acta Orthop 2013;84(1):71–75. DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2013.765621.
  12. Agneskirchner JD, Hurschler C, Stukenborg-Colsman C, et al. Effect of high tibial flexion osteotomy on cartilage pressure and joint kinematics: A biomechanical study in human cadaveric knees. Winner of the AGA-DonJoy Award 2004. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2004;124(9):575–584. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-004-0728-8.
  13. Wallace ME, Hoffman EB. Remodelling of angular deformity after femoral shaft fractures in children. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1992;74(5):765–769. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.74B5.1527131.
  14. McClure PK, Herzenberg JE. The natural history of lower extremity malalignment. J Pediatr Orthop 2019;39(6, Suppl 1):S14–S19. DOI: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000001361.
  15. Standard SC. Chapter 1: Normal limb alignment. In: Chase AE, ed. The Art of Limb Alignment. 8th edition. Baltimore, MD: Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore; 2019, pp. 1–16.
  16. Paley, D. Chapter 6: Sagittal plane deformities. In: Herzenberg JE, ed. Principles of Deformity Correction. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2002.
  17. Solomin LN, Utekhin AI, Vilenskiy VA. Reference values of the femur and tibia mechanical axes and angles in the sagittal plane, determined on the basis of three-dimensional modeling. J Limb Lengthen Reconstr 2020;6(2):116–120. DOI: 10.4103/2455-3719.305861.
  18. McClure PK, Standard SC, Assayag MJ. Chapter 5: Deformity analysis in the sagittal plane. In: Chase AE, ed. The Art of Limb Alignment with Excerpts from the Baltimore Limb Deformity Course Workbook. 9th edition. Baltimore, MD: Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore; 2020, p. 63.
  19. Vilenskiy VA., Solomin LN, Utekhin AI. Femur deformity correction planning in sagittal plane using mechanical axis. J Limb Lengthen Reconstr 2021;7(1):13–18. DOI: 10.4103/jllr.jllr_14_21.
  20. Jud L, Andronic O, Vlachopoulos L, et al. Mal-angulation of femoral rotational osteotomies causes more postoperative sagittal mechanical leg axis deviation in supracondylar than in subtrochanteric procedures. J Exp Orthop 2020;7(1):46. DOI: 10.1186/s40634-020-00262-6.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.