COMPUTER NAVIGATION VERSUS CONVENTIONAL TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT: A PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMISED CONTROL TRIAL SHOWING NO DIFFERENCE IN FUNCTIONAL RESULTS AT FIVE YEARS

Abstract

Introduction: We previously compared component alignment in total knee replacement using a computer-navigated technique with a conventional jig based method. Improved alignment was seen in the computer-navigated group (Beaver et al. JBJS 2004 (86B); 3: 372–7.). We also reported two-year results showing no difference in clinical outcome between the two groups (Beaver et al. JBJS 2007 (89B); 4: 477–80). We now report our five-year functional results comparing navigated and conventional total knee replacement. To our knowlege this represents the first Level 1 study comparing function in navigated and conventional total knee replacement at five years.

Methods: An original cohort of 71 patients undergoing Duracon (Stryker Orthopaedics, St. Leonards, Australia) total knee replacement without patellar resurfacing were prospectively randomised to undergo operation using computer navigation (Stryker Image Free Computer Navigation System (version 1.0; Stryker Orthopaedics))(n=35) or a jig-based method (n=36). The two groups were matched for age, gender, height, weight, BMI, ASA grade and pre-operative deformity. All operations were performed by a single surgeon. All patients underwent review in our Joint Replacement Assessment Clinic at 3, 6 and 12 months and at 2 and 5 years. Reviews were undertaken by senior physiotherpist blinded to participant status using validated outcome scoring tools (Knee Society Score, WOMAC Score and Short Form SF-36 Score). All patients underwent CT scanning of the implanted prosthesis as per Perth CT Knee Protocol to assess component alignment.

Results: After 5 years 24 patients in the navigated group and 22 patients in the conventional group were available for review. At 5 years no statistically significant difference was seen in any of the aforementioned outcome scores when comparing navigated and conventional groups. No statistically significant difference was seen between 2- and 5-year results for either group.

Due to the relatively low numbers in each group these data were compared with retrospective cohorts of navigated (n=100) and conventional (n=70) Duracon total knee replacements performed outwith this study over the same 5-year period. WITHIN the retrospective cohorts no statistically significant differences were found when comparing any of the aforementioned outcome scores. In addition, when comparing parallel scores between prospective and retrospective groups again no statistically significant differences were identified.

Conclusion: At 5-years post-operatively the functional outcome between computer navigated and conventional total knee replacement appears to be no different despite the better alignment achieved using navigation.