Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 1/2008

01-01-2008 | Knee

Computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty versus the conventional technique: how precise is navigation in clinical routine?

Authors: Markus Tingart, Christian Lüring, Holger Bäthis, Johannes Beckmann, Joachim Grifka, Lars Perlick

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 1/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Restoration of the mechanical leg axis and component positioning are crucial factors affecting long-term results in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In a prospective study, 1,000 patients were operated on either using a CT-free navigation system or the conventional jig-based technique. Leg alignment and component orientation were determined on postoperative X-rays. The mechanical leg axis was significantly better in the computer-assisted group (95%, within ±3° varus/valgus) compared to the conventional group (74%, within ±3° varus/valgus) (P < 0.001). On average, the operating time was increased by 8 min in the computer-assisted group. No significant differences were seen between senior and younger surgeons regarding postoperative leg alignment and operating time. Computer-assisted TKA leads to a more accurate restoration of leg alignment and component orientation compared to the conventional jig-based technique. Potential benefits in long-term outcome and functional improvement require further investigation.
Literature
1.
Laskin RS (2001) The Genesis total knee prosthesis: a 10-year followup study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 388:95–102PubMedCrossRef
2.
Rodriguez JA, Bhende H, Ranawat CS (2001) Total condylar knee replacement: a 20-year followup study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 388:10–17PubMedCrossRef
3.
Scott WN, Rubinstein M, Scuderi G (1988) Results after knee replacement with a posterior cruciate-substituting prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 70(8):1163–1173PubMed
4.
Robertsson O, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L (2001) The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register 1975–1997: an update with special emphasis on 41,223 knees operated on in 1988–1997. Acta Orthop Scand 72(5):503–513PubMedCrossRef
5.
Jeffery RS, Morris RW, Denham RA (1991) Coronal alignment after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73(5):709–714PubMed
6.
Rand JA, Coventry MB (1988) Ten-year evaluation of geometric total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 232:168–173PubMed
7.
Ritter MA, Faris PM, Keating EM, Meding JB (1994) Postoperative alignment of total knee replacement. Its effect on survival. Clin Orthop Relat Res 299:153–156PubMed
8.
Petersen TL, Engh GA (1988) Radiographic assessment of knee alignment after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 3(1):67–72PubMedCrossRef
9.
Mahaluxmivala J, Bankes MJ, Nicolai P, Aldam CH, Allen PW (2001) The effect of surgeon experience on component positioning in 673 Press Fit Condylar posterior cruciate-sacrificing total knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty 16(5):635–640PubMedCrossRef
10.
Mielke RK, Clemens U, Jens JH, Kershally S (2001) Navigation in knee endoprosthesis implantation—preliminary experiences and prospective comparative study with conventional implantation technique. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 139(2):109–116PubMedCrossRef
11.
Bathis H, Perlick L, Tingart M, Luring C, Grifka J (2004) CT-free computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty versus the conventional technique: radiographic results of 100 cases. Orthopedics 27(5):476–480PubMed
12.
Perlick L, Bathis H, Tingart M, Perlick C, Grifka J (2004) Navigation in total-knee arthroplasty: CT-based implantation compared with the conventional technique. Acta Orthop Scand 75(4):464–470PubMedCrossRef
13.
Jenny JY, Clemens U, Kohler S, Kiefer H, Konermann W, Miehlke RK (2005) Consistency of implantation of a total knee arthroplasty with a non-image-based navigation system: a case–control study of 235 cases compared with 235 conventionally implanted prostheses. J Arthroplasty 20(7):832–839PubMedCrossRef
14.
Bargren JH, Blaha JD, Freeman MA (1983) Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Correlated biomechanical and clinical observations. Clin Orthop Relat Res 173:178–183PubMed
15.
Hood RW, Vanni M, Insall JN (1981) The correction of knee alignment in 225 consecutive total condylar knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res 160:94–105PubMed
16.
Hvid I, Nielsen S (1984) Total condylar knee arthroplasty. Prosthetic component positioning and radiolucent lines. Acta Orthop Scand 55(2):160–165PubMed
17.
Sparmann M, Wolke B, Czupalla H, Banzer D, Zink A (2003) Positioning of total knee arthroplasty with and without navigation support. A prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85(6):830–835PubMed
18.
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 Relat Res 433:152–159PubMedCrossRef
19.
Decking R, Markmann Y, Fuchs J, Puhl W, Scharf HP (2005) Leg axis after computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized trial comparing computer-navigated and manual implantation. J Arthroplasty 20(3):282–288PubMedCrossRef
20.
Anderson KC, Buehler KC, Markel DC (2005) Computer assisted navigation in total knee arthroplasty: comparison with conventional methods. J Arthroplasty 207(Suppl 3):132–138CrossRef
21.
Chin PL, Yang KY, Yeo SJ, Lo NN (2005) Randomized control trial comparing radiographic total knee arthroplasty implant placement using computer navigation versus conventional technique. J Arthroplasty 20(5):618–626PubMedCrossRef
22.
Kim SJ, MacDonald M, Hernandez J, Wixson RL (2005) Computer assisted navigation in total knee arthroplasty: improved coronal alignment. J Arthroplasty 207(Suppl 3):123–131CrossRef
23.
Bolognesi M, Hofmann A (2005) Computer navigation versus standard instrumentation for TKA: a single-surgeon experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res 440:162–169PubMedCrossRef
24.
Stockl B, Nogler M, Rosiek R, Fischer M, Krismer M, Kessler O (2004) Navigation improves accuracy of rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 426:180–186PubMedCrossRef
25.
Chauhan SK, Scott RG, Breidahl W, Beaver RJ (2004) Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty versus a conventional jig-based technique. A randomised, prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86(3):372–377PubMedCrossRef
26.
Delp SL, Stulberg SD, Davies B, Picard F, Leitner F (1998) Computer assisted knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 354:49–56PubMedCrossRef
27.
Novotny J, Gonzalez MH, Amirouche FM, Li YC (2001) Geometric analysis of potential error in using femoral intramedullary guides in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 16(5):641–647PubMedCrossRef
28.
Reed SC, Gollish J (1997) The accuracy of femoral intramedullary guides in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 12(6):677–682PubMedCrossRef
29.
Laskin RS (2003) New techniques and concepts in total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 416:151–153PubMedCrossRef
30.
Plaskos C, Hodgson AJ, Inkpen K, McGraw RW (2002) Bone cutting errors in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 17(6):698–705PubMedCrossRef
31.
Bathis H, Perlick L, Tingart M, Perlick C, Luring C, Grifka J (2005) Intraoperative cutting errors in total knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 125(1):16–20PubMedCrossRef
32.
Patel DV, Ferris BD, Aichroth PM (1991) Radiological study of alignment after total knee replacement. Short radiographs or long radiographs? Int Orthop 15(3):209–210PubMed
33.
Bathis H, Shafizadeh S, Paffrath T, Simanski C, Grifka J, Luring C (2006) Are computer assisted total knee replacements more accurately placed?: A meta-analysis of comparative studies. Orthopade 35(10):1056–1065PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty versus the conventional technique: how precise is navigation in clinical routine?
Authors
Markus Tingart
Christian Lüring
Holger Bäthis
Johannes Beckmann
Joachim Grifka
Lars Perlick
Publication date
01-01-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 1/2008
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-007-0399-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2008

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 1/2008 Go to the issue

Letter to the Editor

Considerations about the knee arthrography for detection of meniscal tears

Knee

Stiffness of soft tissue complex in total knee arthroplasty

Shoulder

Comparison between single-row and double-row rotator cuff repair: a biomechanical study

Wrist

Arthroscopic all-inside repair of Palmer type 1B triangular fibrocartilage complex tears: a technical note

Shoulder

Coracoid transfer in Bristow–Latarjet procedure: does it modify the biceps muscle?

Knee

Devastating femoral osteomyelitis after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction