CONVENTIONAL TECHNIQUE VS. CAS INTEGRATING LIGAMENT BALANCING IN TKR: A COMPARATIVE PROSPECTIC RANDOMIZED STUDY

Abstract

A comparative prospectic randomized study has been performed between two groups of patients, one undergone to surgery by conventional technique (A) and the other by CAS (B). In all the patients the same type of prosthesis, Innex Ucor® (Zimmer), was implanted by the same surgeon. The surgical technique has been “tibia first” with preliminary ligament balance in both groups.

In CAS technique has been utilized the Navitrack® (Orthosoft) system integrated by an hydraulic tensor, Hydraulic Knee Analyzer® (Zimmer), able to measure the applied force and the obtained space.

Evaluation criteria have been: x-ray alignment (HKA), IKSS, SF-36. Minimum follow-up has been 12 months.

The data shows a statistically significant difference in the group B related to HKA (p< 0,0001) and functional score (p= 0,009). The knee score is “non significant” but it has a “tendency value”, even if the pain score is “significant” (p=0,008). SF-36 isn’t “significant”.

The group B has shown an important reduction of clinical and radiographic outliers.