The posterior condylar offset (PCO) has been proposed as a determinant of a postoperative range of motion after total knee arthroplasty, although there is no consensus. This study aimed to demonstrate the error introduced by forcing the femoral rotation to overlap both condyles for the “true” lateral X‐ray projection for the PCO measurement. We hypothesize that the angular discrepancy between the posterior femoral cortical reference plane and the posterior condylar axis plane due to rotation invalidates the acquisition of reliable measurements on X‐rays. We have measured the PCO in 50 “true” lateral X‐rays and compared it with the medial and lateral condyles PCO's assessed on a computed tomography‐scan‐based three‐dimensional (3D) model of each knee. PCO based on the 3D imaging differed significantly between the medial (25.8 ± 3.67 mm) and lateral (16.59 ± 2.92 mm) condyle. Three‐dimensional PCO values differ significantly from those determined in the radiographic studies. Also, the mean values of the medial and lateral condyle PCO measurements differed significantly (p < 0.001) with all PCO measurements on radiographs. We have identified a difference between the posterior cortical plane and the posterior condylar axis projections, both on the axial plane with a mean value of 11.23° ± 3.64°. Our data show an interplane discrepancy angle between the posterior femoral diaphyseal cortical and the posterior condylar axis plane (due to the femur's necessary rotation to overlap both condyles) may invalidate the 2D X‐ray PCO assessment as a reliable measurement.

There have been remarkable advances in knee replacement surgery over the last few decades. One of the concerns continues to be the accuracy in achieving the desired alignment. Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) was developed to increase component placement accuracy, but the available evidence is not conclusive. Our study aimed to determine a PSI system’s three-dimensional accuracy on 3D virtual models obtained by post-operative computed tomography. We compared the angular placement values of 35 total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) operated within a year obtained with the planned ones, and we analyzed the possible relationships between alignment and patient-reported outcomes. The mean (SD) discrepancies measured by two experienced engineers to the planned values observed were 1.64° (1.3°) for the hip–knee–ankle angle, 1.45° (1.06°) for the supplementary angle of the femoral lateral distal angle, 1.44° (0.97°) for the proximal medial tibial angle, 2.28° (1.78°) for tibial slope, 0.64° (1.09°) for femoral sagittal flexion, and 1.42° (1.06°) for femoral rotation. Neither variables related to post-operative alignment nor the proportion of change between pre-and post-operative alignment influenced the patient-reported outcomes. The evaluated PSI system’s three-dimensional alignment analysis showed a statistically significant difference between the angular values planned and those obtained. However, we did not find a relevant effect size, and this slight discrepancy did not impact the clinical outcome.