Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
You currently have no access to view or download this content. Please log in with your institutional or personal account if you should have access to through either of these
The Bone & Joint Journal Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from The Bone & Joint Journal

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

View my account settings

Knee

Comparison of the clinical and radiological outcomes of three minimally invasive techniques for total knee replacement at two years



Download PDF

Abstract

Minimally invasive total knee replacement (MIS-TKR) has been reported to have better early recovery than conventional TKR. Quadriceps-sparing (QS) TKR is the least invasive MIS procedure, but it is technically demanding with higher reported rates of complications and outliers. This study was designed to compare the early clinical and radiological outcomes of TKR performed by an experienced surgeon using the QS approach with or without navigational assistance (NA), or using a mini-medial parapatellar (MP) approach. In all, 100 patients completed a minimum two-year follow-up: 30 in the NA-QS group, 35 in the QS group, and 35 in the MP group. There were no significant differences in clinical outcome in terms of ability to perform a straight-leg raise at 24 hours (p = 0.700), knee score (p = 0.952), functional score (p = 0.229) and range of movement (p = 0.732) among the groups. The number of outliers for all three radiological parameters of mechanical axis, frontal femoral component alignment and frontal tibial component alignment was significantly lower in the NA-QS group than in the QS group (p = 0.008), but no outlier was found in the MP group.

In conclusion, even after the surgeon completed a substantial number of cases before the commencement of this study, the supplementary intra-operative use of computer-assisted navigation with QS-TKR still gave inferior radiological results and longer operating time, with a similar outcome at two years when compared with a MP approach.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:906–10.


Correspondence should be sent to Dr H-T. Huang; e-mail:

For access options please click here