NAVIGATION ACHIEVES ACCURATE ALIGNMENT IN TKR BETWEEN DIFFERENT POPULATIONS

Abstract

Introduction: Computer navigation systems allow real time evaluation of knee behaviour intraoperatively. Measurements made by navigation reflect soft tissue balance throughout surgery. We studied three different populations of patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR) with a CT-free navigation system where the goal was to achieve normal alignment. We compared the initial pathological kinematics in each group with the resultant kinematics after correction.

Method: The Orthopilot® was used during TKR for three groups of patients A (n=71), B(n=60) and C(n=43) all with endstage osteoarthritis. Patients in groups A and B had TKR performed by surgeon 1, and group C by surgeon 2.

Results: Pre-operatively, the mean mechanical femoral axis and the mean mechanical femoro-tibial (MFT) angle were calculated. The mean mechanical femoral axis for group A was −0.5° varus (−6° to 9°), group B was −0.68° varus(−6° to 6°), and for group C was 2.67° valgus (−12° to 10°). P< 0.0001, using Kruskal-Wallis test. Pre-operatively, the mean MFT angle for group A was −3.75° varus(−15° to 17°), group B was −2.98° varus(−17° to 13°), and for group C was 0.16° valgus(−17° to 25°). P=0.003 using Kruskal-Wallis test. These results show that the initial preoperative kinematics are different for the three different populations.

Post-operatively we measured the mean MFT angle in groups A, B and C. In group A, the mean MFT angle was −0.38° varus (−4° to 2°), group B was −0.41° varus(−5° to 2°), and group C was −0.02° varus(−3° to 5°). P=0.7 using the Kruskal-Wallis test. These results show that the post-operative kinematics are similar between the three different populations.

Discussion: Populations A and B preoperatively exhibited a mean varus MFT angle (−0.5° and −0.68° respectively), compared with a mean valgus MFT angle for group C(2.67°), which were statistically significantly different. Although different surgeons operated on the 3 groups (surgeon 1 operated on groups A and B, and surgeon 2 operated on group C), post-operative kinematics were within a narrow range (−0.02° to −0.41°) and not statistically different (p=0.7).

Conclusion: The Orthopilot® results showed that these populations had different initial pathological kinematics. Despite this, and using different operators we obtained similar post-op results within a narrow range. Computer navigation produces reliable, reproducible results independent of population or operator variables.