Study on the Distribution Characteristics of Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) Classification in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis and Healthy Individuals in Yunnan,China
-
摘要:
目的 探究中国云南地区膝骨关节炎患者与健康人群的膝关节冠状面对线(coronal plane alignment of the knee,CPAK)分型分布特征。 方法 纳入云南地区膝骨关节炎患者243例(263膝)为骨关节炎组,健康年轻人69例(138膝)为健康组。根据髋膝踝角(hip knee ankle angle,HKA)、股骨远端外侧角(lateral distal femoral angle,LDFA)、胫骨近端内侧角(medial proximal tibial angle,MPTA)等参数,计算算术髋-膝-踝角(arithmetic hip knee ankle angle,aHKA)和关节线倾角(jointline obliquity,JLO)并进行CPAK分型,比较不同分组间的分型差异。 结果 健康组以CPAK 2型(37.7%)、1型(23.9%)、3型(17.4%)为主,无7、8、9型分布;骨关节炎组以CPAK 1型(53.2%)、4型(22.1%)为主,8型无分布,9型仅1例。校正年龄、BMI、性别后,两组间各CPAK分型差异均无统计学意义(P > 0.05);健康组不同性别CPAK分型无显著差异(P > 0.05),双侧CPAK分型一致性仅39.1%;骨关节炎组不同性别、年龄(<65岁与≥65岁)、BMI(<25 kg/m2 与≥25 kg/m2)分组间CPAK分型比较差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05),均以1型、4型为主。骨关节炎组结构性内翻比 例(77.6%)显著高于健康组(32.6%),MPTA低于健康组,LDFA、aHKA高于健康组(P < 0.001)。 结论 在云南健康人群和骨关节炎患者中最常见的类型分别为2型和1型。性别、BMI、年龄不影响CPAK分型分布,对侧肢体不宜作为全膝关节置换术冠状位对线规划的可靠参考。 Abstract:Objective To investigate the distribution characteristics of the Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and healthy individuals in Yunnan, China . Methods A total of 243 KOA patients (263 knees) from Yunnan were enrolled as the KOA group, and 69 healthy young adults (138 knees) as the healthy group. Based on parameters including the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), and medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), the arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA) and joint line obliquity (JLO) were calculated to determine the CPAK classification. Differences in classification distribution among subgroups were compared. Results The healthy group was predominantly composed of CPAK type 2 (37.7%), type 1 (23.9%), and type 3 (17.4%), with no cases of types 7, 8, or 9. The KOA group was mainly composed of CPAK type 1 (53.2%) and type 4 (22.1%), with no cases of type 8 and only one case of type 9. After adjusting for age, BMI, and gender, no statistically significant differences were found in any CPAK type between the two groups (P > 0.05). In the healthy group, there were no significant differences in CPAK distribution between genders (P > 0.05), and bilateral consistency of CPAK classification was only 39.1%. In the KOA group, no significant differences in CPAK types were observed among subgroups stratified by gender, age (<65 years vs. ≥65 years), or BMI (<25 kg/m2 vs. ≥25 kg/m2) (P > 0.05), with type 1 and type 4 being predominant in all subgroups. The proportion of constitutional varus in the KOA group (77.6%) was significantly higher than that in the healthy group (32.6%). Compared with the healthy group, the KOA group had lower MPTA, higher LDFA, and higher aHKA (P < 0.001). Conclusions The most common distributions in Yunnan healthy and osteoarthritic populations were types 2 and 1, respectively. Gender, BMI, and age do not affect the distribution of CPAK types. The contralateral limb should not be used as a reliable reference for coronal alignment planning in total knee arthroplasty. -
表 1 CPAK分型
Table 1. CPAK classification
aHKA (MPTA − LDFA) 内翻
(<−2°)中立
(0 ± 2)°外翻
(>2°)JLO
(MPTA + LDFA)远端顶点
(<177°)CPAK 1 CPAK 2 CPAK 3 中立
(180 ± 3)°CPAK 4 CPAK 5 CPAK 6 近端顶点
(>183°)CPAK 7 CPAK 8 CPAK 9 表 2 骨关节炎组观察者组内、组间测量一致性
Table 2. Intra-observer and inter-observer measurement consistency in the osteoarthritis group
参数 观察组内 观察组间 ICC系数 P 95%CI ICC系数 P 95%CI MPTA 0.886 <0.001* (0.775,0.944) 0.881 <0.001* (0.765,0.942) LDFA 0.873 <0.001* (0.753,0.937) 0.884 <0.001* (0.773,0.943) HKA 0.907 <0.001* (0.814,0.955) 0.890 <0.001* (0.783,0.946) *P < 0.05。 表 3 健康组观察者组内、组间测量一致性
Table 3. Intra-group and inter-group measurement consistency in the healthy group
参数 观察组内 观察组间 ICC系数 P 95%CI ICC系数 P 95%CI MPTA 0.879 <0.001* (0.763,0.941) 0.877 <0.001* (0.743,0.942) LDFA 0.891 <0.001* (0.783,0.946) 0.888 <0.001* (0.740,0.949) HKA 0.897 <0.001* (0.793,0.950) 0.899 <0.001* (0.793,0.951) *P < 0.05。 表 4 健康组与关节炎组的人口统计学信息
Table 4. Demographic information of the healthy group and the osteoarthritis group
参数 健康组 骨关节炎组 χ2/t P 患者/膝 69/138 243/263 性别(男/女) 43/26 44/199 52.23 <0.001* 侧别(左/右) 69/69 116/147 1.27 0.261 年龄(岁) 24.42 ± 1.38 67.70 ± 7.48 85.25 <0.001* 体重(kg) 64.68 ± 11.90 64.61 ± 9.80 −0.05 0.962 身高(cm) 168.67 ± 7.43 158.15 ± 6.95 −10.93 <0.001* BMI(kg/m2) 22.58 ± 2.94 25.86 ± 3.83 7.62 <0.001* *P < 0.05。 表 5 健康组与关节炎组的下肢对线参数及CPAK分型分布
Table 5. Distribution of lower limb alignment parameters and CPAK classification between the healthy group and the osteoarthritis group
参数 健康组 骨关节炎组 χ2/t P MPTA(°) 86.63 ± 2.60 84.66 ± 4.72 5.391 <0.001* LDFA(°) 87.05 ± 2.68 90.22 ± 3.93 −9.519 <0.001* aHKA(°) −0.42 ± 3.61 −5.56 ± 7.5 9.261 <0.001* JLO(°) 173.69 ± 3.86 174.88 ± 4.39 −2.706 0.007* HKA(°) 178.23 ± 2.31 171.09 ± 9.08 9.074 <0.001* aHKA分型 结构性内翻 45(32.6) 204(77.6) 87.712 <0.001* 中立位 60(43.5) 23(8.7) 结构性外翻 33(23.9) 36(13.7) JLO分型 远端顶点关节线 109(79.0) 178(67.7) 0.017* 水平关节线 29(21.0) 78(29.7) 近端顶点关节线 0(0) 7(2.7) CPAK分型分布 CPAK-1 33(23.9) 140(53.2) <0.001* CPAK-2 52(37.7) 17(6.5) CPAK-3 24(17.4) 22(8.4) CPAK-4 13(9.4) 58(22.1) CPAK-5 9(6.5) 6(2.3) CPAK-6 7(5.1) 13(4.9) CPAK-7 0(0.0) 6(2.3) CPAK-8 0(0.0) 0(0.0) CPAK-9 0(0.0) 1(0.4) *P < 0.05。 表 6 校正年龄、BMI、性别后 CPAK 分型多因素回归分析结果
Table 6. Results of multivariate regression analysis for CPAK classification after adjusting for age,BMI and gender
CPAK分型(vs 1型) OR 95%CI下限 95%CI上限 P 2型 1.179 0.062 22.487 0.913 3型 5.013 0.301 83.533 0.261 4型 0.599 0.08 4.488 0.618 合并型 2.619 0.184 37.288 0.477 *P < 0.05。 表 7 健康组不同性别下肢对线参数及CPAK分型分布
Table 7. Lower limb alignment parameters and CPAK classification distribution in the healthy group
参数 男性 女性 χ2/t P MPTA(°) 86.30 ± 2.41 87.18 ± 2.82 −1.942 0.054 LDFA(°) 87.06 ± 2.85 87.04 ± 2.40 0.043 0.966 aHKA(°) −0.76 ± 3.49 0.14 ± 3.77 −1.422 0.157 JLO(°) 173.36 ± 3.96 174.22 ± 3.65 −1.27 0.206 HKA(°) 177.78 ± 2.20 178.96 ± 2.33 −2.969 0.004* aHKA分型 结构性内翻 31(36.1) 14(26.9) 2.494 0.287 中立位 38(44.2) 22(42.3) 结构性外翻 17(19.8) 16(30.8) JLO分型 远端顶点关节线 73(84.9) 36(69.2) 4.784 0.029* 水平关节线 13(15.1) 16(30.8) 近端顶点关节线 0(0%) 0(0) CPAK分型分布 CPAK-1 24(27.9) 9(17.3) 0.145 CPAK-2 36(41.9) 16(30.8) CPAK-3 13(15.1) 11(21.2) CPAK-4 7(8.1) 6(11.5) CPAK-5 4(4.7) 5(9.6) CPAK-6 2(2.3) 5(9.6) *P < 0.05。 表 9 健康组左右侧的CPAK、JLO和aHKA一致性
Table 9. Consistency of CPAK,JLO,and aHKA on the left and right sides in the healthy group
双侧一致 双侧不一致 Cohen's Kappa 系数 P值 CPAK 27(39.1%) 42(60.9%) 0.1992 0.003* aHKA 35(50.7%) 34(49.3%) 0.2500 0.0007 *JLO 53(76.8%) 16(23.2%) 0.2599 0.0698 **P < 0.05。 表 8 健康组双侧下肢对线参数及CPAK分型分布
Table 8. Distribution of bilateral lower extremity alignment parameters and CPAK classification in the healthy group
参数 左侧 右侧 t P MPTA(°) 86.43 ± 2.40 86.84 ± 2.79 −1.163 0.249 LDFA(°) 87.22 ± 2.79 86.88 ± 2.57 1.133 0.261 aHKA(°) −0.79 ± 3.87 −0.04 ± 3.31 −1.959 0.054 JLO(°) 173.65 ± 3.48 173.72 ± 4.22 −0.128 0.898 HKA(°) 178.12 ± 2.24 178.33 ± 2.39 −0.89 0.377 aHKA分型 结构性内翻 28(40.6) 17(24.6) 中立位 27(39.1) 33(47.8) 结构性外翻 14(20.3) 19(27.5) JLO分型 远端顶点关节线 56(81.2) 53(76.8) 水平关节线 13(18.8) 16(23.2) 近端顶点关节线 0(0) 0(0) CPAK分型分布 CPAK-1 20(29.0) 13(18.8) CPAK-2 24(34.8) 28(40.6) CPAK-3 12(17.4) 12(17.4) CPAK-4 8(11.6) 5(7.3) CPAK-5 4(5.8) 5(7.3) CPAK-6 1(1.5) 6(8.7) *P < 0.05。 表 10 骨关节炎组男性患者和女性患者下肢对线参数及CPAK分型分布
Table 10. Distribution of lower limb alignment parameters and CPAK classification in male and female patients in the osteoarthritis group
参数 男性 女性 t P MPTA(°) 84.00 ± 4.39 84.81 ± 4.79 −1.089 0.277 LDFA(°) 91.00 ± 3.81 90.04 ± 3.95 1.545 0.124 aHKA(°) −7.00 ± 6.80 −5.23 ± 7.63 0.492 0.136 JLO(°) 175.00 ± 4.64 174.86 ± 4.34 0.681 0.833 HKA(°) 169.72 ± 7.89 171.41 ± 9.32 0.466 0.241 aHKA分型 结构性内翻 43(87.8) 161(75.2) 0.213 中立位 2(4.1) 21(9.8) 结构性外翻 4(8.2) 32(15.0) JLO分型 远端顶点关节线 33(67.3) 145(67.8) 0.769 水平关节线 14(28.6) 64(29.9) 近端顶点关节线 2(4.1) 5(2.3) CPAK分型分布 0.308 CPAK-1 32(65.3) 108(50.5) CPAK-2 1(2.0) 16(7.5) CPAK-3 1(2.0) 21(9.8) CPAK-4 10(20.4) 48(22.4) CPAK-5 1(2.0) 5(2.3) CPAK-6 2(4.1) 11(5.1) CPAK-7 2(4.1) 4(1.9) CPAK-8 0(0.0) 0(0.0) CPAK-9 0(0.0) 1(0.5) *P < 0.05。 表 11 骨关节炎组不同年龄患者下肢对线参数及CPAK分型分布
Table 11. Distribution of lower limb alignment parameters and CPAK classification in patients of different ages in the osteoarthritis group
参数 <65岁 ≥65岁 χ2/t P MPTA(°) 84.49 ± 4.57 84.75 ± 4.81 −0.431 0.667 LDFA(°) 90.36 ± 3.8 90.15 ± 4.01 0.407 0.684 aHKA(°) −5.87 ± 7.03 −5.4 ± 7.75 −0.485 0.628 JLO(°) 174.85 ± 4.6 174.9 ± 4.29 −0.098 0.922 HKA(°) 170.31 ± 8.36 171.5 ± 9.43 −1.007 0.315 aHKA分型 结构性内翻 71(78.9) 133(76.9) 0.941 0.625 中立位 9(10) 14(8.1) 结构性外翻 10(11.1) 26(15) JLO分型 远端顶点关节线 61(67.8) 117(67.6) 0.392 水平关节线 25(27.8) 53(30.6) 近端顶点关节线 4(4.4) 3(1.7) CPAK分型分布 CPAK-1 47(52.2) 93(53.8) 0.659 CPAK-2 7(7.8) 10(5.8) CPAK-3 8 (8.9) 14(8.1) CPAK-4 20 (22.2) 38(22.0) CPAK-5 2(2.2) 4(2.3) CPAK-6 2(2.2) 11(6.4) CPAK-7 3(3.3) 3(1.7) CPAK-8 0(0.0) 0(0.0) CPAK-9 1(1.1) 0(0.0) *P < 0.05。 表 12 不同BMI患者的下肢对线线参数及CPAK分型分布
Table 12. Distribution of lower limb alignment parameters and CPAK classification in patients with different BMI
参数 BMI<25 BMI≥25 χ2/t P MPTA(°) 84.98 ± 4.95 84.45 ± 4.56 0.99 0.323 LDFA(°) 90.31 ± 3.95 90.16 ± 3.93 −0.225 0.822 aHKA(°) −5.33 ± 7.82 −5.71 ± 7.3 0.741 0.459 JLO(°) 175.29 ± 4.38 174.62 ± 4.39 0.862 0.39 HKA(°) 171.69 ± 10.31 170.66 ± 8.09 0.913 0.362 aHKA分型 结构性内翻 83(75.5) 121(79.1) 0.551 0.759 中立位 11(10) 12(7.8) 结构性外翻 16(14.5) 20(13.1) JLO分型 远端顶点关节线 73(66.4) 105(68.6) 0.939 水平关节线 34(30.9) 44(28.8) 近端顶点关节线 3(2.7) 4(2.6) CPAK分型分布 CPAK-1 56(50.9) 84(54.9) 0.214 CPAK-2 10(9.1) 7(4.6) CPAK-3 7(6.4) 15(9.8) CPAK-4 24(21.8) 34(22.2) CPAK-5 1(0.9) 5(3.3) CPAK-6 9(8.2) 4(2.6) CPAK-7 3(2.7) 3(2.0) CPAK-8 0(0.0) 0(0.0) CPAK-9 0(0.0) 1(0.7) *P < 0.05。 表 13 骨关节炎组左右侧的CPAK、JLO和aHKA一致性
Table 13. Consistency of CPAK,JLO and aHKA on the left and right sides in the osteoarthritis group
双侧一致 双侧不一致 CPAK 8(40.0%) 12(60.0%) 20对 aHKA 17(85.0%) 3(15.0%) JLO 11(55.0%) 9(45.0%) -
[1] Karasavvidis T, Pagan Moldenhauer C A, Lustig S, et al. Definitions and consequences of current alignment techniques and phenotypes in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) - there is no winner yet[J]. J Exp Orthop, 2023, 10(1): 120. doi: 10.1186/s40634-023-00697-7 [2] Karasavvidis T, Pagan Moldenhauer C A, Haddad F S, et al. Current concepts in alignment in total knee arthroplasty [J]. J Arthroplasty, 2023, 38(7 Suppl 2): S29-s37. [3] Wan X F, Yang Y, Wang D, et al. Comparison of outcomes after total knee arthroplastyinvolving postoperative neutral or residual mild varus alignment: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Orthop Surg, 2022, 14(2): 177-189 doi: 10.1111/os.13155 [4] Sappey-Marinier E, Shatrov J, Batailler C, et al. Restricted kinematic alignment may be associated with increased risk of aseptic loosening for posterior-stabilized TKA: a case-control study[J]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2022, 30(8): 2838-2845. doi: 10.1007/s00167-021-06714-5 [5] Bellemans J, Colyn W, Vandenneucker H, et al. The chitranjan ranawat award: is neutral mechanical alignment normal for all patients? The concept of constitutional varus[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2012, 470(1): 45-53. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-1936-5 [6] Lustig S, Sappey-Marinier E, Fary C, et al. Personalized alignment in total knee arthroplasty: Current concepts[J]. SICOT j, 2021, 7: 19. doi: 10.1051/sicotj/2021021 [7] Gibbons J P, Zeng N, Bayan A, et al. No difference in 10-year clinical or radiographic outcomes between kinematic and mechanical alignment in TKA: A randomized trial[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2025, 483(1): 140-149. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003193 [8] Macdessi S J, Griffiths-Jones W, Harris I A, et al. Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) classification: A new system for describing knee phenotypes[J]. Bone Joint J, 2021, 103-b(2): 329-337. [9] Nomoto K, Hanada M, Hotta K, et al. Distribution of coronal plane alignment of the knee classification does not change as knee osteoarthritis progresses: A longitudinal study from the Toei study[J]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2023, 31(12): 5507-5513. doi: 10.1007/s00167-023-07604-8 [10] Pagan C A, Karasavvidis T, Lebrun D G, et al. Geographic variation in knee phenotypes based on the coronal plane alignment of the knee classification: A systematic review [J]. J Arthroplasty, 2023, 38(9): 1892-1899. e1. [11] Zhao G, Ma C, Luo Z, et al. A systematic review of geographic differences in knee phenotypes based on the coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) classification[J]. Arthroplasty, 2025, 7(1): 26. doi: 10.1186/s42836-025-00311-4 [12] Giurazza G, Tanzilli A, Franceschetti E, et al. Coronal plane alignment of the knee phenotypes distribution varies significantly as a function of geographic, osteoarthritic and sex-related factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2025, 33(10): 3592-3605. doi: 10.1002/ksa.12704 [13] Yang H Y, Yoon T W, Kim J Y, et al. Radiologic assessment of knee phenotypes based on the coronal plane alignment of the knee classification in a korean population[J]. Clin Orthop Surg, 2024, 16(3): 422-429. doi: 10.4055/cios23250 [14] MacDessi S J, Griffiths-Jones W, Harris I A, et al. The arithmetic HKA (aHKA) predicts the constitutional alignment of the arthritic knee compared to the normal contralateral knee: A matched-pairs radiographic study[J]. Bone Jt Open, 2020, 1(7): 339-345. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.17.BJO-2020-0037.R1 [15] Griffiths-Jones W, Chen D B, Harris I A, et al. Arithmetic hip-knee-ankle angle (aHKA): An algorithm for estimating constitutional lower limb alignment in the arthritic patient population[J]. Bone Jt Open, 2021, 2(5): 351-358. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.25.BJO-2021-0028.R1 [16] Hsu C E, Chen C P, Wang S P, et al. Validation and modification of the coronal plane alignment of the knee classification in the asian population[J]. Bone Jt Open, 2022, 3(3): 211-217. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.33.BJO-2022-0001.R1 [17] Motta D P D, Silva L D, Kropf L L, et al. Assessment of the Radiographic Angular Parameters in the Coronal Plane of the Lower Limbs in Subjects without Knee Osteoarthritis in a Reference Hospital of the Brazilian Unified Health System[J]. Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo), 2024, 59(6): e839-e846. [18] Phruetthiphat O A, Pinijprapa P, Uthaicharatratsame C. Distribution and gender-specific differences of coronal plane alignment of healthy knee[J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2024, 19(1): 879. doi: 10.1186/s13018-024-05380-w [19] Mulpur P, Desai K B, Mahajan A, et al. Radiological evaluation of the phenotype of indian osteoarthritic knees based on the coronal plane alignment of the knee classification (CPAK)[J]. Indian J Orthop, 2022, 56(12): 2066-2076. doi: 10.1007/s43465-022-00756-8 [20] Gao Y H, Qi Y M, Huang P H, et al. Distribution of coronal plane alignment of the knee classification in Chinese osteoarthritic and healthy population: a retrospective cross-sectional observational study[J]. Int J Surg, 2024, 110(5): 2583-2592. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001178 [21] Toyooka S, Osaki Y, Masuda H, et al. Distribution of coronal plane alignment of the knee classification in patients with knee osteoarthritis in Japan[J]. J Knee Surg, 2023, 36(7): 738-743. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1742645 [22] Wong W K, Abu Bakar Sajak A, Chua H S. The distribution of Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) phenotypes in the Malaysian population and their correlation with demographic variables[J]. Arthroplasty, 2024, 6(1): 60. doi: 10.1186/s42836-024-00281-z [23] 马成元, 王建朋, 赵光辉, 等. 中国西北地区膝骨关节炎患者冠状面对线的分布特征分析[J]. 实用骨科杂志, 2025, 31(12): 1083-1088. [24] Şenel A, Eren M, Sert S, et al. Phenotyping of the Turkish population according to Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee classification: A retrospective cross-sectional study[J]. Jt Dis Relat Surg, 2024, 35(1): 194-201. doi: 10.52312/jdrs.2023.1464 [25] Hovinga K R, Lerner A L. Anatomic variations between Japanese and Caucasian populations in the healthy young adult knee joint[J]. J Orthop Res, 2009, 27(9): 1191-1196. doi: 10.1002/jor.20858 [26] Song M H, Yoo S H, Kang S W, et al. Errata to “Coronal alignment of the lower limb and the incidence of constitutional varus knee in Korean females ”[J]. Knee Surg Relat Res, 2015, 27(3): 197. doi: 10.5792/ksrr.2015.27.3.197 [27] Coetzee K, Charilaou J, Burger M, et al. Increased prevalence of valgus constitutional alignment subtypes in a South African arthritic population group using the coronal plane alignment of the knee (CPAK) classification[J]. Knee, 2024, 49: 158-166. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2024.04.010 [28] Grant S, Van De Graaf V, Chen D, et al. The coronal plane alignment of the knee classification: How it works, How to apply it, and How it can affect outcomes in knee reconstruction surgery [J]. JB JS Open Access, 2025, 10(4). [29] Steele J R, Jang S J, Brilliant Z R, et al. Deep learning phenotype automation and cohort analyses of 1, 946 knees using the coronal plane alignment of the knee classification [J]. J Arthroplasty, 2023, 38(6): S215-S221. e1. [30] Huber S, Mitterer J A, Vallant S M, et al. Gender-specific distribution of knee morphology according to CPAK and functional phenotype classification: analysis of 8739 osteoarthritic knees prior to total knee arthroplasty using artificial intelligence[J]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2023, 31(10): 4220-4230. doi: 10.1007/s00167-023-07459-z [31] Li S, Chen X, Liu S, et al. Gender, BMI, and age-related variations in lower limb alignment parameters and CPAK phenotypes in Chinese patients with knee osteoarthritis[J]. Orthop Surg, 2024, 16(12): 3098-3106. doi: 10.1111/os.14253 [32] Jiang X, Xie K, Chen H, et al. A radiographic analysis of coronal morphological parameters of lower limbs in Chinese non-knee osteoarthritis populations[J]. Orthop Surg, 2024, 16(2): 452-461. doi: 10.1111/os.13952 [33] Hwang D, Wook Choi M, Kim S H, et al. Age and sex differences in coronal lower extremity alignment in a healthy Asian population[J]. Knee, 2023, 45: 198-206. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2023.09.009 [34] Shao W, Hou H, Han Q, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of knee osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional survey in Nanjing, China[J]. Front Public Health, 2024, 12: 1441408. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1441408 [35] Dong Y, Yan Y, Zhou J, et al. Evidence on risk factors for knee osteoarthritis in middle-older aged: a systematic review and meta analysis[J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2023, 18(1): 634. doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-04089-6 [36] Brophy R H, Haas A K, Huston L J, et al. Association of meniscal status, lower extremity alignment, and body mass index with chondrosis at revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction[J]. Am J Sports Med, 2015, 43(7): 1616-1622. doi: 10.1177/0363546515578838 [37] Zhang J, Gao Y, Zhang C, et al. Low bilateral consistency restricts the utility of the contralateral CPAK as a reliable reference for planning coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty[J]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2025, 26(1): 921. doi: 10.1186/s12891-025-09210-w [38] Pujol O, Hinarejos P, Pons A, et al. Poor side-to-side symmetry limits the use of the contralateral limb as a reliable reference for guiding coronal positioning and alignment in total knee arthroplasty[J]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2025, 33(10): 3621-3628. doi: 10.1002/ksa.12714 [39] Rahman A, Lee M, Tan L, et al. Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee (CPAK) distribution in a diverse Asian population: Influence of ethnicity, sex and bilaterality[J]. J Exp Orthop, 2025, 12(2): e70192. doi: 10.1002/jeo2.70192 [40] Chen X, Shao C, Li L, et al. Prevalence of knee osteoarthritis in the Chinese population, 2013-2023: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2025, 20(1): 916. doi: 10.1186/s13018-025-06270-5 [41] 廖婕, 吴琼瑶, 吴功华, 等. 1990—2023年中国膝骨关节炎疾病负担现状及趋势分析[J]. 中国修复重建外科杂志, 2025, 39(11): 1381-1387. -
下载: