
Learn the Total Knee Replacement: De Puy Attune implant surgical technique with step by step instructions on OrthOracle. Our e-learning platform contains high resolution images and a certified CME of the Total Knee Replacement: De Puy Attune implant surgical procedure.
A total knee replacement is one of the most commonly performed and successful operations available, with 85-90% of patients achieving significant improvements in pain. In excess of 70000 are performed in the NHS per annum.
In this case the patient is a 76 year old female with widespread symptomatic osteoarthritis. She had exhausted conservative measures to combat the pain but was still suffering significant negative impact on her quality of life on a daily basis. She was counselled that the procedure is a pain-relieving operation only. It would not predictably improve her pre-operative range of motion. This is vital for the patient to grasp as many seek total knee replacement as a “cure for stiffness”. However due to retraction of the soft tissues, including the joint capsule, gastrocnemius tendons and hamstrings, resurfacing of the distal femur and the proximal tibia is not guaranteed to eradicate a fixed flexion deformity of improve on flexion. There are techniques, which will be described, to try to help however no assurance should be offered by the surgeon, so as to avoid disappointing their patient.
This particular implant namely the Depuy Attune is, at the time of writing, fairly new onto the market. It is therefore advisable, and indeed my practice, to closely monitor and audit the results of surgery versus a well-established implant. As well as submitting data to the National Joint Registry it is also my practice to record pre- and post-operative patient-reported outcome measures and any complications, all with the patient’s prior consent. To date these show an average improvement of 23.5 points on the Oxford Knee Score scale or “change score” at 6 months, which compares favourably to the NJR published average of 16.5. One-year averages have increased to 26.3.
The procedure described is a left cemented total knee replacement with a cruciate retaining fixed-bearing implant, using the measured resection technique. However there are several technical options available with the De Puy Attune including instrumentation for balanced resection. The femur can be sized by both anterior and posterior referencing. As well as versatility from an instrumentation perspective the implants options are also broad with standard and narrow femurs and 1mm increments between tibial inserts. In my own experience one of the simplest and yet most helpful feature is the low profile tibial trial tray. Often thicker trays impinge on the lateral femoral condyle and inadvertently internally rotate the tray relative to the pre-cut posterior slope (improved patellar tracking; avoidance of varus tray positioning). However the De Puy Attune tray is free to rotate in the optimal position as the low profile can slide under the lateral femoral condyle. I also feel that the instrumentation stands up well in knees with limited flexion (stiffness; obesity). Furthermore my patients ROM recovery with the Attune has been significantly quicker than my previous experience.

INDICATIONS:
PAIN – as mentioned in the overview it is imperative that the patient is fully understanding of the fact that total knee replacement is a pain relieving procedure. It is the final step on a spectrum of options for reducing the overriding disabiling symptoms of osteoarthritis, or indeed inflammatory arthropathy. Only once the patient has fully trialled and complied with conservative, non-operative measures (see below) should discussion of a total knee replacement be considered.
SYMPTOMS & ASSESSMENT:
Pain – arising from the knee rather than referred (beware pain referred from the ipsilateral hip). Knee pain attributable to arthritis of the knee can be both mechanical (on walking) and at rest, especially causing sleep disturbance
Stiffness – as the knee degenerates the loss of articular cartilage reduces its ability for frictionless motion. Furthermore the formation of osteophytes especially posteriorly increases impingement during flexion and tenting of the posterior capsule, which reduces extension
Deformity – often described as varus (with excessive medial compartment wear) or valgus (with excessive lateral compartment wear)
INVESTIGATION:
X-ray – weightbearing images including antero-posterior, lateral and sky-line views. Optionally a Schuss or Rosenberg view can be taken (AP image with the knee flexed to 30 degrees). The images help to demonstrate a loss of joint space, osteophyte formation, development of subchondral cysts and sclerosis.
Long-leg views – luxury! These images are very helpful for planning purposes and to demonstrate deformity. Often with a normal contralateral knee the surgeon can assess the patient’s physiological alignment in both the coronal plane (anatomical axis versus mechanical axis) and sagittal plane (tibial slope). Furthermore a long-leg view becomes more imperative with a history of tibial or femoral fracture as malunion can alter mechanical alignment.
MRI – though less helpful due to the lack of weightbearing options it can be helpful to elucidate the extent of articular cartilage damage in cases where the x-rays are less helpful than expected (e.g. with limited arthritis)
OPERATIVE ALTERNATIVES:
Unicompartmental knee replacement
Peri-articular osteotomy
Fusion
NON-OPERATIVE ALTERNATIVES:
“The analgesic ladder” – from activity avoidance through to increasingly strong pain-killers including paracetamol, opiate-derived anagesia and NSAIDs
Weightloss
Steroid / hyaluronic acid injections
Physiotherapy
CONTRAINDICATIONS:
Active infection
Systemic infection
Bone-stock inadequate to support a total knee arthroplasty (e.g. severe osteoporosis)
Inadequate extensor mechanism

A high thigh tourniquet is applied. Pre-operative antibiotics are given in line with the hospital’s formulary taking into consideration any patient allergies. The operative field is shaved of hair. A side support, L-shaped foot bracket and sand bag is used to support the knee in a flexed position of around 90 degrees. The surgeon can choose whether to stand on the same or opposite side to optimise ergonomic comfort and visualisation.

The following is a routine protocol however each case would be individualised dependent of patient-specific needs (e.g. allergies, pre-operative thromboprophyaxis etc):
Physiotherapy
Full weight bearing can commence once any nerve blocks have resolved and quads engagement has returned. The ideal is to recover range of motion as soon as possible and discharge home once safely mobilising and flexion approaches 90 degrees.
Medications
Antibiotics – two further doses of prophylactic antibiotics (flucloxacillin) is routine
Thromboprophylaxis – low molecular weight heparin prophylaxis should adhere to NICE guidance supplemented with mechanical agents (foot pumps / graduated stockings)
Analgesia – titrated pain relief is key which should control pain well enough to aid progress but not to immobilise the patient for a prolonged period
Radiology
Post-operative check xrays are performed day 1 or day 2 AP and lateral and if possible skyline views. This checks for implant cementation, implant sizing and ensure there are no unexpected fractures.
Wound management
Ideally the sterile wound dressing applied in theatre should remain undisturbed until it is time to remove the skin clips (14 days). The wool and crêpe can be removed at 24 hours to enable the application of ice to reduce swelling and avoid impedence of exercises.
Follow-up
Routing follow-up in the outpatients should be around 6 weeks to check on wound healing and the progression of range of motion. It must however be emphasised that if the patient or the GP are concerned in anyway, often with a potential superficial wound infection that the surgeon would like to know about this as soon as possible.

The National Joint Registry (NJR) is in essence a huge near-live audit of the performance of arthroplasty surgery in the UK. It is now on its 14th Annual Report which is accessible online http://www.njrcentre.org.uk/. There is a great deal of information here with 108713 knee arthroplasties reported in the last 12 months, down to individual implants and their survival. The reader can compare cemented versus uncemented (2% of TKRs implanted) knee replacement performance, cruciate-retaining (62.2%) vs posterior-stabilised (19.8%) and total versus unicompartmental (9.2%) knee replacements. The quoted cumulated risk of revision at 13 years is:
cemented TKR 4.2%
uncemented TKR 5.4%
cruciate retaining TKR 3.8%
posterior stabilised TKR 4.7% (posterior stabilised AND uncemented TKR 12.1%)
Age is also reportedly a major factor. For patients with a median age of implantation of 69 years 13-year revision rate is 4% but this increases to 10% for patients under 55 years of age.
It must however be emphasised that the NJR reports revision risk only. The success of a TKR should be cautiously associated with survivorship as a number of patients may be dissatisfied with their joint replacement but not been moved to revision. The registry plans to collect and share patient-related outcome scores, as per the New Zealand Joint Registry which will be hugely helpful.
I would strongly urge surgeons to collect as many patient-related outcome scores for self-auditing purposes. As reported by Rothwell et al early poor PROMs correlate strongly with early revision show can act as an alert to closely observe these patients (An analysis of the Oxford hip and knee scores and their relationship to early joint revision in the New Zealand Joint Registry .A. G. Rothwell, G. J. Hooper, A. Hobbs, C. M. Frampton. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2010;92-B:413-18).
Whilst demonstrating that low Oxford hip and knee scores at 6-months correlated well with early revision this paper’s strongest demonstration of a relationship was with a Kalairajah score of <27 (poor) being associated with a 27% risk of UKR revision within 6-months.
Most common causes of failure and hence revision include in order aseptic loosening, pain and infection.
The controversy about patella resurfacing continues. Interestingly there are often geographical variations in opinion neatly summarised by Adbel et al. There is broad agreement that the patella should be resurfaced in inflammatory disease and in non-congruent patellae but otherwise resurfacing remains contentious( The patella in total knee replacement: to resurface or not is the question A P Adbel, S Parratte, N C Budhiparama. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 2014 Jun; 7(2):117-124).
Vogues come and go such as the “Mini-incision” TKR and computer-assisted TKR as often studies demonstrate no clinically significant advantage. Newer techniques include the use of robotics to accurate mill rather than saw bone and customised cutting blocks.
The key element to grasp is that patients must be counselled on their expectation of a total knee replacement which in broad terms would be:
85-90% chance of a successful outcome (survival of implant and satisfactory PROMs)
5% chance of a complication (infection, pain, stiffness, neurovascular injury, DVT, PE, revisiosn surgery)
5-10% chance of a dissatisfaction (low PROMs) despite no obvious complication
A lot of effort is being done to identify patients at risk of low satisfaction and so minimise the risk but it remains a difficult nut to crack.
Reference
- orthoracle.com





















































