Top

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

Published in:

01-04-2009 | Knee

Comparative study of the use of computer assisted navigation system for axial correction in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Authors: Mui-Hong Lim, Andras Tallay, John Bartlett

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 4/2009

Abstract

The aim of our study was to compare the use of the Orthopilot Navigation system with conventional non-navigation technique for medial UKA with respect to the intraoperative mechanical limb alignment measurements and correlation with the postoperative radiological measurements. The postoperative mechanical limb alignment axes of 51 consecutive medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty performed by a single surgeon over a 12-month period were measured. The cases were randomly assigned to two groups of which 21 cases were performed using conventional non-navigation based technique and 30 cases were performed using the Orthopilot Navigation System. Computed tomography (CT) scanogram was performed for all cases within the same hospitalization stay to assess the postoperative mechanical limb alignment. Our results showed that the non-navigated group had a more neutral mechanical axis with a narrower range compared to the navigation assisted group. The difference in the mean mechanical axis between the two groups was statistically not significant. There was poor correlation between the intraoperative navigation system measurements and the postoperative radiological measurements. In conclusion, the use of computer navigation in UKA is not as well validated as compared to TKA. We did not demonstrate any improvement in postoperative axial limb alignment measurement in using a computer navigation system compared to conventional non-navigation technique.

Anderson KC, Buehler KC, Markel DC (2005) Computer assisted navigation in total knee arthroplasty: comparison with conventional methods. J Arthroplasty 20:132–138PubMedCrossRef

Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (2007) Annual Report. Adelaide, AOA

Bauwens K, Matthes G, Wich M, Gebhard F, Hanson B, Ekkernkamp A, Stengel D (2007) Navigated total knee replacement. A meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:261–269PubMedCrossRef

Bejek Z, Solyom L, Szendroi M (2007) Experiences with computer navigated total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 31:617–622PubMedCrossRef

Collier MB, Eickmann TH, Sukezaki F, McAuley JP, Engh GA (2006) Patient, implant, and alignment factors associated with revision of medial compartment unicondylar arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 21:108–115PubMedCrossRef

Cossey AJ, Spriggins AJ (2005) The use of computer-assisted surgical navigation to prevent malalignment in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 20:29–34PubMedCrossRef

Ensini A, Catani F, Leardini A, Romagnoli M, Giannini S (2007) Alignments and clinical results in conventional and navigated total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 457:156–162PubMed

Furnes O, Espehaug B, Lie SA, Vollset SE, Engesaeter LB, Havelin LI (2007) Failure mechanisms after unicompartmental and tricompartmental primary knee replacement with cement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:519–525PubMedCrossRef

Haaker RG, Stockheim M, Kamp M, Proff G, Breitenfelder J, Ottersbach A (2005) Computer-assisted navigation increases precision of component placement in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 433:152–159PubMed

10.

Hernigou P, Deschamps G (2004) Alignment influences wear in the knee after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 423:161–165PubMedCrossRef

11.

Jenny JY, Boeri C (2003) Unicompartmental knee prosthesis implantation with a non-image-based navigation system: rationale, technique, case-control comparative study with a conventional instrumented implantation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 11:40–45PubMed

12.

Jenny JY, Muller PE, Weyer R, John M, Weber P, Ciobanu E, Schmitz A, Bacher T, Neumann W, Jansson V (2006) Navigated minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 29:S117–S121PubMed

13.

Keene G, Simpson D, Kalairajah Y (2006) Limb alignment in computer-assisted minimally-invasive unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:44–48PubMedCrossRef

14.

Kennedy WR, White RP (1987) Unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee. Postoperative alignment and its influence on overall results. Clin Orthop 221:278–285PubMed

15.

Kim YH, Kim JS, Yoon SH (2007) Alignment and orientation of the components in total knee replacement with and without navigation support: a prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89:471–476PubMedCrossRef

16.

Koskinen E, Paavolainen P, Eskelinen A, Pulkkinen P, Remes V (2007) Unicondylar knee replacement for primary osteoarthritis: a prospective follow-up study of 1,819 patients from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 78:128–135PubMedCrossRef

17.

Macule-Beneyto F, Hernandez-Vaquero D, Segur-Vilalta JM, Colomina-Rodriguez R, Hinarejos-Gomez P, Garcia-Forcada I, Seral Garcia B (2006) Navigation in total knee arthroplasty. A multicenter study. Int Orthop 30:536–540PubMedCrossRef

18.

Matziolis G, Krocker D, Weiss U, Tohtz S, Perka C (2007) A prospective, randomized study of computer-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty. Three-dimensional evaluation of implant alignment and rotation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:236–243PubMedCrossRef

19.

Picard F, Deakin AH, Clarke JV, Dillon JM, Gregori A (2007) Using navigation intraoperative measurements narrows range of outcomes in TKA. Clin Orthop 463:50–57PubMed

20.

Ridgeway SR, McAuley JP, Ammeen DJ, Engh GA (2002) The effect of alignment of the knee on the outcome of unicompartmental knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84:351–355PubMedCrossRef

21.

Spencer JM, Chauhan SK, Sloan K, Taylor A, Beaver RJ (2007) Computer navigation versus conventional total knee replacement: no difference in functional results at two years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89:477–480PubMedCrossRef

22.

The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register (2006) Annual Report, Department of Orthopedics, Lund University Hospital

23.

Tingart M, Luring C, Bathis H, Beckmann J, Grifka J, Perlick L (2008) Computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty versus the conventional technique: how precise is navigation in clinical routine? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16:44–50PubMedCrossRef

24.

Whiteside LA (2005) Making your next unicompartmental knee arthroplasty last: three keys to success. J Arthroplasty 20:2–3PubMedCrossRef

Title: Comparative study of the use of computer assisted navigation system for axial correction in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty
Authors: Mui-Hong Lim
Andras Tallay
John Bartlett
Publication date: 01-04-2009
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 4/2009
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-008-0655-2

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Comparative study of the use of computer assisted navigation system for axial correction in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2009

All-inside, suture anchor repair for meniscal root tears

Arthroscopic excision of sternoclavicular joint

Rotator cuff injury: still a clinical controversy?

Clinical results and radiographical evaluation of opening wedge high tibial osteotomy for spontaneous osteonecrosis of the knee

Does soccer participation lead to genu varum?

Surgical treatment of patellar dislocation in children with Down syndrome: a 3- to 11-year follow-up study