Aims: The aim of this paper was to evaluate the position of the endoprosthesis after standard and navigated insertion in both sagittal and frontal planes. Methods: From October 2000 to March 2002, 90 Search Evolution TKR were performed in 65 females and 25 males with mean age 68 years because of primary or post-traumatic osteoarthritis. Every third patient received this endoprosthesis without use of navigation. The study sample was so divided into two groups. The þrst group was constituted of 60 patients with TKRs inserted with use of navigation. The second group was formed by 30 patients with TKRs inserted with standard manner. All results were statistically analyzed. Results: The mean lateral tibiofemoral angle was in the 1st group 174,3¡ and in the 2nd group 174,9¡, the mean lateral distal femoral angle was in the 1st group 83,5¡ and in the 2nd group 83,7¡, the mean medial proximal tibial angle was in the 1st group 88,9¡ and in the 2nd group 89,2¡, the mean posterior distal femoral angle was in the 1st group 88,5¡ and in the 2nd group 86,6¡, the mean posterior proximal tibial angle was in the 1st group 88,9¡ and in the 2nd group 88,2¡. The femorotibial axis deviation from 174¡ was greater than 2¡ in the 1st group in 12,3% and in the 2nd group in 27,8% of cases. Conclusions: Kinematic navigation affords a possibility to place both femoral and tibial components more precisely than in implantation with standard manner. The more precise femoral component position in sagittal plane was achieved with navigation in this study.