Top

Published in:

01-12-2009 | Original Paper

Does computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty improve patient outcome at midterm follow-up?

Authors: Yogeesh D. Kamat, Kamran M. Aurakzai, Ajeya R. Adhikari, Daniel Matthews, Yegappan Kalairajah, Richard E. Field

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 6/2009

Abstract

Computer navigation assistance in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) results in consistently accurate alignment of prostheses. We aimed to compare the outcome of computer-navigated and conventional TKA and to analyse the radiologically malaligned knees. We analysed 637 primary TKA, carried out by a single surgeon, over five consecutive years and divided them into two cohorts: group 1 = STA (standard instrumentation) and group 2 = CAS (computer-assisted surgery). There was no significant difference between the average Oxford Knee Scores (OKS) of the two groups at any time from one to five years. However, the malaligned TKA at three years had a worse OKS. At medium term there is no difference in clinical outcome measures that can be attributed to the surgeon having used computer-assisted navigation for TKA. But group 1, having a higher proportion of malaligned TKA, might show worsening of OKS at long term.

Bäthis H, Perlick L, Tingart M et al (2004) Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. A comparison of computer-assisted surgery with the conventional technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86(5):682–687CrossRefPubMed

Bejek Z, Sólyom L, Szendrõi M (2007) Experiences with computer navigated total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 31(5):617–622CrossRefPubMed

Bolognesi M, Hofmann A (2005) Computer navigation versus standard instrumentation for TKA: a single-surgeon experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res 440:162–169CrossRefPubMed

Chauhan S, Clark G, Lloyd S, Scott R et al (2004) Computer-assisted total knee replacement. A controlled cadaver study using a multi-parameter quantitative CT assessment of alignment (the Perth CT Protocol). J Bone Joint Surg Br 86(6):818–823CrossRefPubMed

Davies AP (2002) Rating systems for total knee replacement. Knee 9(4):261–266CrossRefPubMed

Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D et al (1998) Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80(1):63–69CrossRefPubMed

Dunbar MJ, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L (2001) Appropriate questionnaires for knee arthroplasty. Results of a survey of 3600 patients from The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83(3):339–344CrossRefPubMed

Fehring TK, Mason JB, Moskal J, Pollock DC, Mann J, Williams VJ (2006) When computer-assisted knee replacement is the best alternative. Clin Orthop Relat Res 452:132–136CrossRefPubMed

Field RE, Cronin MD, Singh PJ (2005) The Oxford hip scores for primary and revision hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87(5):618–622CrossRefPubMed

10.

Haaker R, Stockheim M, Kamp M et al (2005) Computer-assisted navigation increases precision of component placement in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 433:152–159CrossRefPubMed

11.

Jeffery RS, Morris RW, Denham RA (1991) Coronal alignment after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73:709–714PubMed

12.

Liow RY, Walker K, Wajid MA et al (2003) Functional rating for knee arthroplasty: comparison of three scoring systems. Orthopedics 26(2):143–149PubMed

13.

Maculé-Beneyto F, Hernández-Vaquero D, Segur-Vilalta JM et al (2006) Navigation in total knee arthroplasty. A multicenter study. Int Orthop 30(6):536–540CrossRefPubMed

14.

Martin A, von Strempel A (2006) Two-year outcomes of computed tomography-based and computed tomography free navigation for total knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 449:275–282PubMed

15.

Matsumoto T, Tsumura N, Kurosaka M et al (2006) Clinical values in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 29:1115–1120PubMed

16.

Rand JA, Coventry MB (1988) Ten-year evaluation of geometric total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 232:168–173PubMed

17.

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

18.

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(4):477–480CrossRefPubMed

19.

Stulberg SD (2003) How accurate is current TKR instrumentation? Clin Orthop Relat Res 416:177–184CrossRefPubMed

Title: Does computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty improve patient outcome at midterm follow-up?
Authors: Yogeesh D. Kamat
Kamran M. Aurakzai
Ajeya R. Adhikari
Daniel Matthews
Yegappan Kalairajah
Richard E. Field
Publication date: 01-12-2009
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: International Orthopaedics / Issue 6/2009
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0690-0

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Does computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty improve patient outcome at midterm follow-up?

Abstract

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2009

Metal release and corrosion effects of modular neck total hip arthroplasty

Risk factors for pulmonary embolism after hip and knee arthroplasty: a population-based study

Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review

Osteolysis with a cementless second generation metal-on-metal cup in total hip replacement

Aseptic stem loosening in primary THA: migration analysis of cemented and cementless fixation

Factors predicting the failure of Bernese periacetabular osteotomy: a meta-regression analysis