Abstract
Computer navigation has the potential to revolutionise orthopaedic surgery, although according to the latest 7th Annual NJR Report, only 2% of the 5 800 unicompartmental knee replacements (UKRs) performed in 2009 were carried out using ‘image guidance.’ The report also states an average 3-year revision rate for UKRs of 6.5%. Previous NJR data has shown that this figure rises up to 12% for certain types of prosthesis. We suspect that a significant proportion of these revisions are due to failure secondary to component malpositioning. We therefore propose that the use of computer navigation enables a more accurate prosthesis placement, leading to a reduction in the revision rate for early failure secondary to component malpositioning. Our early results of one hundred consecutive computer navigated UKRs are presented and discussed.
Ninety-two patients having had one hundred consecutive computer navigated UKRs were reviewed both clinically and radiographically. The Smith & Nephew Accuris fixed-bearing modular prosthesis was used in all cases, with the ‘Brainlab’ navigation system. Pre-operative aim was neutral tibial cut with three degrees posterior slope. Post-operative component alignment was measured with PACs web measuring tools. Patients were scored clinically using the Oxford Knee Score.
Our patient cohort includes 54 male knees and 46 female knees. Average age is 66.6yrs. Average length of stay was 3.7 days, (range 2–7.) With respect to the tibial component, average alignment was 0.7° varus, and 2.32° posterior slope. All components were within the acceptable 3 degrees deviation. Functional scores are very satisfactory, with an overall patient satisfaction rate of 97%.
To date, only one UKR has required revision. This was due to ongoing medial pain due to medial overhang, not related to computer navigation. There was one superficial infection, with full resolution following a superficial surgical washout, debridement and antibiotics. Unlike complications reported in the NJR, we report no peri-prosthetic fractures or patella tendon injuries.
Our results demonstrate accurate prosthesis placement with the use of computer navigation. Furthermore, clinical scores are highly satisfactory. Our current revision rate is 1% at a mean of 27 months post-op. Although longer-term follow-up of our group is required, our results compare very favourably to statistics published in the NJR, (average 3-year revision rate 6.5%.) The only major differences appear to be the type of prosthesis used and the use of computer navigation. It is our proposal that computer navigation reduces the number of revisions required due to component malpositioning and subsequent failure. Furthermore, we believe that this challenging surgery is made easier with the use of computer navigation. We expect our longer-term results to show significant benefits of computer navigation over conventional techniques.
