Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY WITH CONVENTIONAL INSTRUMENTATION OR WITH A COMPUTER-ASSISTED SYSTEM



Abstract

Purpose: Most revisions of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) occur before the fifth year. The leading cause is prosthesis malalignment. Computer-assisted surgery is presented as a technique which improves implantation precision. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the radiographic quality of computer-assisted TKA implantation in comparison with conventional implantation.

Material and methods: A prospective randomised study was conducted with a total of 82 patients assigned randomly to conventional instrumentation (group 1) or computer-assisted implantation (group 2). The two groups were comparable for age, gender, body mass index, side, and preoperative femorotibial angle (HKA). The same surgeon operated all patients using the same cemented posterostabilised prosthesis. Radiographically, the HKA, the theta angle between the mechanical and anatomic femoral axis, the angle of the femoral and tibial implantations, and the posterior tibial slope were noted. All measures were taken by an independent operator who was unaware of the operative technique.

Results: There was no statistical difference in the HKA 177.5° in group 1 and 179.2° in group 2 (p=0.13); the theta angle was 6° in group 1 and 5.9° in group 2 (p=0.78); the femoral implantation angle was 90.3° in group 1 and 90° in group 2 (p=0.74); the posterior tibial slope was 3.5° in group 1 and 3.15° in group 2 (p=0.65). There was a statistical difference in the tibial angle, 87.3° in group 1 and 89° in group 2 (p=0.012).

Discussion: This study demonstrates a significant improvement in the navigation group for the position of the tibial implant and no difference for the femoral implant. This might be related to the cut guide which allowed more intra-operative adjustment for the tibia. Blood loss was equivalent in the two groups (503 mg) and operative time was longer in the navigation group (18 minutes).

Conclusion: It appears important to have specifically adapted cut guides for computer-assisted surgery and to reduce operative time.

Correspondence should be addressed to SOFCOT, 56 rue Boissonade, 75014 Paris, France.