Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) improves mechanical alignment and the accuracy of surgical cuts in the context of total knee arthroplasty. A simplified, CAOS enhanced instrumentation system was assessed to determine if the same effects could be achieved through the use of a less intrusive system. Two cohorts of surgeons (experienced and trainees) performed a series of total knee arthroplasty resections in knee models with and without navigation-enhanced instrumentation. The percentage of resections that deviated from the planned cut by more than 2°or 2mm (outliers) was determined by post-resection advanced imaging for six unique outcome metrics. Within each experience level, the use of the CAOS enhanced system significantly reduced the total percentage of outliers as compared to conventional instrumentation (Figure 1). The experienced users improved from 35% to 4% outliers overall (p < .001) and the trainees from 34% to 10% outliers (p < .001). Comparing across experience levels, the experienced surgeons performed significantly better in only a single resection metric with conventional instrumentation (Figure 2A), varus/valgus tibial alignment, with 8.3% outliers compared to the trainee's 63% outliers (p = .004). The use of CAOS enhanced instrumentation eliminated any differences between the two user groups for all measured resections (Figure 2B). Comparing CAOS enhanced to conventional instrumentation specifically between anatomical deformity types revealed that there is significant improvement (p < .05) with the use of enhanced instrumentation for all three deformity types (Figure 3). These results suggest that non-intrusive CAOS enhanced instrumentation is a viable alternative to conventional instrumentation with possible benefits. This trial also demonstrates that additional experience may not correlate to improved surgical accuracy, and outliers may be less a result of individual surgeon ability or specific anatomic deformities, and more so related to limitations of the instrumentation used or other yet unidentified factors

As previous meta-analyses on the alignment outcomes of Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) did not differentiate between CAOS systems, limited information is available on the accuracy of a specific CAOS system based on clinical cases. This study assessed the accuracy and precision of achieving surgical goals in approximately 7000 cases using a specific contemporary CAOS system. Alignment parameters were extracted from the technical logs of 6888 TKA surgeries performed between October 2012 and January 2017 using a contemporary CAOS system. The following surgical parameters were investigated: 1) planned resection defined by the surgeon prior to the bone cuts; 2) Checked resection defined as digitalisation of the bony cuts. Deviations in alignment between planned and checked resections were evaluated, with acceptable resections defined as no more than 3° of resection deviations. For the tibial resection, deviations in tibial varus/valgus angle and posterior tibial slope were 0.06 ± 0.94° and −0.09 ± 1.73°, respectively. For the femoral resection, deviations in femoral varus/valgus angle amd femoral flexion were 0.00 ± 0.97° and −0.17 ± 1.44°, respectively. High percentages of the resections were found to be acceptable (>94% of the cases). The CAOS system investigated was shown to provide accurate and precise intra-operative assistance to the surgeon in achieving targeted resections. The study summarised a large number of cases spanning the application history of the specific CAOS system, including both experienced users and new adopters of the technology. The data provided a complete clinical relevant evaluation demonstrating its high accuracy and precision in resection alignment

INTRODUCTION. The functional and anatomical results of TKA revisions are less good than a primary TKA. The TKA revision frequency increases and we must improve our surgeries and prepare the next standard of these surgeries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the CAOS / one stage strategie to treat the knee PJIs. MATERIALS. In this prospective study, between September 2011 and December 2014, 41 patients treated for chronic knee PJI in a one stage revision. For all of them, an imageless CAOS system (ExactechGPS, Blue- Ortho, Gieres) was used. A personalised profile of revision was created. All surgeries were performed with the same protocole and by using the same Optetrak CC knee components (Exactech, Gainesville, FL). All operations were performed by a single senior surgeon. Indications for the revision TKA were (1) revision of a primary TKA or unicondylar knee arthroplasty (n=27) or (2) revision of revisionTKA (n=15). The measurement of the HKA angle, the Oxford score and the ROM were evaluated pre and post- operatively. RESULTS. 27 males and 14 females with an average age of 71 years old (55–87) were treated for a PIJ (1 unicompartimental prosthesis, 26 TKA and 15 RTKA). The mean follow-up was 41 months (30 months − 6 years). The average time of surgery was 135 mn (120–195) for an average hospitalisation duration of 10 days (7–16). No postoperative outliers were reported (mean preop.: −1,6°+/_−5,1° − Post- op. −0,3°+/_ −1,4°). The average ROM were 115° (90–130°) (Fig. 1). The rate of success for the infection was 92,7%. We report no specific CAS complications and all the navigations were finalised. In this series of complex cases, the rate of infection healing is 92,7%. DISCUSSION. Using CAOS is a safe option with no specific complication. Combined with one stage procedures, it should be an optimal medico-economical strategy for Knee revisions. This first series initiated the « GPS RTKA » project to create a dedicated software evaluated since January 2016 with immediate very good functional results and no complications. For figures and tables, please contact authors directly

Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) has been demonstrated to increase accuracy to component alignment of total knee arthroplasty compared to conventional techniques. The purpose of this study was to assess if learning affects resection alignment using a specific CAOS system. Nine surgeons, each with >80 TKA experience using a contemporary CAOS system were selected. Prior to the study, six surgeons had already experienced with CAOS TKA (experienced), while the rest three were new to the technology (novice). The following surgical parameters were investigated: 1) planned resection, resection parameters defined by the surgeon prior to the bone cuts; 2) checked resection, digitalisation of the realised resection surfaces. Deviations in the alignment between planned and checked resections were compared between the first 20 cases (in learning curve) and the last 20 cases (well past learning curve) within each surgeon. Any significance detected (p < 0.05) with >1° difference in means indicated clinically meaningful impact on alignment by the learning phase. Both pooled and surgeon-specific analysis exhibited no clinically meaningful significant difference between the first 20 and the last 20 cases from both experienced and novice surgeon groups. The resections in both the first 20 and the last 20 cases demonstrated acceptable rates of over 95% in alignment (<3° deviation) for both experienced and novice surgeons. This study demonstrated that independent of the surgeon's prior CAOS experiences, the CAOS system investigated can provide an accurate and precise solution to assist in achieving surgical resection goals with no clinically meaningful compromise in alignment accuracy and outliers during the learning phase

The hip centre (HC) in Computer Assisted Orthopedic Surgery (CAOS) can be determined either with anatomical (AA) or functional approaches (FA). AA is considered as the reference while FA compute the hip centre of rotation (CoR). Four main FA can be used in CAOS: the Gammage, Halvorsen, pivot, and least-moving point (LMP) methods. The goal of this paper is to evaluate and compare with an in-vitro experiment (a) the four main FA for the HC determination, and (b) the impact on the HKA. The experiment has been performed on six cadavers. A CAOS software application has been developed for the acquisitions of (a) the hip rotation motion, (b) the anatomical HC, and (c) the HKA angle. Two studies have been defined allowing (a) the evaluation of the precision and the accuracy of the four FA with respect to the AA, and (b) the impact on the HKA angle. For the pivot, LMP, Gammage and Halvorsen methods respectively: (1) the maximum precision reach 14.2, 22.8, 111.4 and 132.5 mm; (2) the maximum accuracy reach 23.6, 40.7, 176.6 and 130.3 mm; (3) the maximum error of the frontal HKA is 2.5°, 3.7°, 12.7° and 13.3°; and (4) the maximum error of the sagittal HKA is 2.3°, 4.3°, 5.9°, 6.1°. The pivot method is the most precise and accurate approach for the HC localisation and the HKA computation

INTRODUCTION. Despite that computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) has been shown to offer increased accuracy to the bony resections compared to the conventional techniques [1], previous studies of CAOS have mostly focused on alignment outcomes based on a small number of patients [1]. Although several recent meta-analyses on the CAOS outcomes have been reported [2], these analyses did not differentiate between systems, while system-dependency has been reported to influence alignment parameters [3]. To date, no study has benchmarked a specific CAOS system based on a large number of clinical cases. The purpose of this study is to assess the accuracy and precision of bony resection in more than 4000 cases using a specific contemporary CAOS system. Materials and Methods. Technical logs of 4292 TKAs performed between October 2012 and January 2016 using a contemporary CAOS system (ExactechGPS, Blue-Ortho, Grenoble, FR) were analyzed. The analyses were performed on: 1) planned resection, defined by the surgeon prior to the bone cuts. These parameters serve as inputs for the CAOS guidance; and 2) Checked resection, defined as digitalization of the actual resection surfaces by manually pressing an instrumented checker onto the bony cuts. Deviations in alignment and resection depths (on the referenced side) between planned and checked resections were calculated in coronal and sagittal planes for both tibia and femur (planned vs checked). Results. Summary and distribution of the deviations in resection parameters are presented in Table 1 and Fig 1. On average, the alignment deviations were near 0°, and the deviations in resection depths were less than 0.15mm. Small standard deviations were observed. Discussion. This study demonstrated that the CAOS system investigated can offer accurate and precise intra-operative guidance to the surgeon in achieving his/her surgical goals. TKA performed using conventional instruments is reported to achieve satisfactory lower limb alignment (within ±3° of alignment deviation) in only 70–80% of the cases [2,4], which may contribute to 20% of patients being dissatisfied with the results of surgery [5]. This study reviewed a large number of cases spanning the application history of the specific CAOS system, providing a complete clinically relevant evaluation of its accuracy and precision in terms of bony resection. The results confirmed that the system investigated can be used with confidence that the surgical goals can be achieved with accuracy and reliability. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly (see Info & Metrics tab above).

INTRODUCTION. Although several meta-analyses have been performed on total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) [1], understanding the inter-site variations of the surgical profiles may improve the interpretation of the results. Moreover, information on the global variations of how TKA is performed may benefit the development of CAOS systems that can better address geographic-specific operative needs. With increased application of CAOS [2], surgeon preferences collected globally offers unprecedented opportunity to advance geographic-specific knowledge in TKA. The purpose of this study was to investigate geographic variations in the application of a contemporary CAOS system in TKA. Materials and Methods. Technical records on more than 4000 CAOS TKAs (ExactechGPS, Blue-Ortho, Grenoble, FR) between October 2012 and January 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 682 personalized surgical profiles, set up based on surgeon's preferences, were reviewed. These profiles encompass an extensive set of surgical parameters including the number of steps to be navigated, the sequence of the surgical steps, the definition of the anatomical references, and the parameters associated with the targeted cuts. The profiles were compared between four geographic regions: United States (US), Europe (EU), Asia (AS), and Australia (AU) for cruciate-retaining (CR) and posterior-stabilized (PS) designs. Clinically relevant statistical differences (CRSD, defined as significant differences in means ≥1°/mm) were identified (significance defined as p<0.05). Results. For resection parameters, CRSDs were found between regions in posterior tibial slope (PTS), tibial resection depth, as well as femoral flexion for both CR and PS profiles (marked in Table 1). Regarding anatomical references, US was the only region using posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) as the reference for CR resection depth (Table 1). Differences in percentage of preference were found in the anatomical references for tibial varus/valgus, tibial resection depth, femoral varus/valgus, femoral axial rotation, and ankle center (Table 1,2). For surgical steps, EU and AU were found to apply gap balancing technique as a common practice for the PS designs, while for the CR designs, EU and AU considerably adopted this technique (Table 2). For PS designs, EU and AU profiles preferred tibial first in the resection workflow, compared to a more balanced preference for other regions. For CR designs, US profiles were in favour of performing the femoral resection first in the workflow, compared to a strong favouring of tibial first resection workflow in EU and AS Am regions. Discussion. This study demonstrated clinically significant geographic differences may exist in the surgeons' preference of surgical parameters, anatomical references, and surgical workflow steps during TKA. These differences may reflect the geographic variations of surgeon training, surgical philosophy, or the specific characteristics of the patient population, which warrants further investigation. The strength of this study was that it is the first study to date that covered all the available surgical profiles spanning the application history of a specific CAOS system. As such, variation due to the operational differences of multiple systems was avoided. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly (see Info & Metrics tab above).

Introduction. The number of total hip arthroplasties has been increasing worldwide, and it is expected that revision surgeries will increase significantly in the near future. Although reconstructing normal hip biomechanics with extensive bone loss in the revision surgery remains challenging. The custom−made acetabular component produced by additive manufacturing, which can be fitted to a patient's anatomy and bone defect, is expected to be a predominant reconstruction material. However, there have been few reports on the setting precision and molding precision of this type of material. The purpose of this study was to validate the custom−made acetabular component regarding postoperative three−dimensional positioning and alignment. Methods. Severe bone defects (Paprosky type 3A and 3B) were made in both four fresh cadaveric hip joints using an acetabular reamer mimicking clinical cases of acetabular component loosening or osteolysis in total hip arthroplasty. On the basis of computed tomography (CT) after making the bone defect, two types of custom−made acetabular components (augmented type and tri−flanged type) that adapted to the bone defect substantially were produced by an additive manufacturing machine. A confirmative CT scan was taken after implantation of the component, and then the data were installed in an analysis workstation to compare the postoperative component position and angle to those in the preoperative planning. Results. The mean absolute deviations of the center of the hip joint between preoperative planning and the actual component position in the augmented type were 0.7 ± 0.4 mm for the horizontal position, 0.2 ± 0.1 mm for the vertical position, and 0.5 ± 0.3 mm for the antero−posterior position. The mean absolute deviations of the center of the hip joint in the tri−flanged type in the horizontal, vertical, and antero−posterior positions were 1.0 ± 0.4 mm, 0.4 ± 0.2 mm, 0.3 ± 0.1 mm, respectively. The mean absolute deviations of the component angle were 3.5° ± 0.9° at inclination and 2.0° ± 1.7° at anteversion in the augmented type and 0.6° ± 0.5° at inclination and 0.9° ± 0.3° at anteversion in the tri−flanged type. Conclusion. Since custom−made orthopaedic implants produced by additive manufacturing can support individual anatomy and bone defect, this type of implant is expected to be applied to revision surgery and bone tumor surgery for severe bone defects. The present study demonstrated that preoperative planning of the center of the hip joint was successfully reproduced after the implantation of both types of custom−made acetabular components. In the tri−flanged type, better satisfactory results were provided in the component position and angle by comparing the past CAOS tools such as a surgical navigation system and a patient−specific guide. There is scope for further improvement, but the custom−made acetabular component produced by additive manufacturing may become very useful reconstruction material in hip revision surgeries. Problems to be addressed in the future include the improvement of the reproducibility of the preoperative planning and investigation of long−term clinical results

INTRODUCTION. Studies have reported that only 70–80% of the total knee arthroplasty (TKA) cases using conventional instruments can achieve satisfactory alignment (within ±3° of the mechanical axis). Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) has been shown to offer increased accuracy and precision to the bony resections compared to conventional techniques [1]. As the early adopters champion the technology, reservation may exist among new CAOS users regarding the ability of achieving the same results. The purpose of this study was to investigate if there are immediate benefits in the accuracy and precision of achieving surgical goals for the novice surgeons, as compared to the experienced surgeons, by using a contemporary CAOS system. Materials and Methods. Two groups of surgeons were randomly selected from TKAs between October 2012 and January 2016 using a CAOS system (ExactechGPS, Blue-Ortho, Grenoble, FR), including:. Novice group (7 surgeons): no navigation experience prior to the adoption of the system and have performed ≤20 CAOS TKAs. To investigate the intra-group variation, this group was further divided into surgeons with extensive experience in conventional TKA (novice-senior), and surgeons who were less experienced (novice-junior). Experiences group (6 surgeons): used the CAOS system for more than 150 TKAs. All the surgeries from the novice group (86 cases) and the most recent 20 cases from each surgeon in the experienced group (120 cases) were studied. Deviations in the resection parameters between the following were investigated for both tibia and femur: 1) planned resection, resection goals defined prior to the bone cuts; 2) checked resection, digitization of the realized bone cuts. The deviations were compared within the novice group (novice-senior vs novice-junior), as well as between the novice and experience groups. Knees with optimal resection (deviation<2°/mm, without clinically alter the joint mechanics [2]) and acceptable resection (deviation<3°/mm, as commonly adopted) were identified. Significance was defined as p<0.05. Results. A summary of the deviations is presented in Table 1. No statistical differences were found between the senior and the junior surgeons in the novice group. Similarly, no differences were found between the experienced group and novice group, except for that the cases in the novice group tended to resect slightly more bone in the tibia (p<0.01), and had slightly larger standard deviations compared to the experienced group. The experienced and novice groups had comparable, high percentages of the knees in both the optimal and acceptable categories (Fig 1). Discussion. This study demonstrated that regardless of the surgeon's experience with TKA, new adoption of the CAOS system investigated can immediately benefit the accuracy and precision of the bony resections at a comparable level with experience CAOS users. Although significant difference was found between novice and experienced groups in tibial resection depth, the difference (0.57mm) was clinically irrelevant. The CAOS system offers substantial reduction of the outliers compared to TKAs performed with conventional instruments [3]

A number of advantages of unicondylar arthroplasty (UKA) over total knee arthroplasty in patients presenting osteoarthritis in only a single compartment have been identified in the literature. However, accurate implant positioning and alignment targets, which have been shown to significantly affect outcomes, are routinely missed by conventional techniques. Computer Assisted Orthopaedic Surgery (CAOS) has demonstrated its ability to improve implant accuracy, reducing outliers. Despite this, existing commercial systems have seen extremely limited adoption. Survey indicates the bulk, cost, and complexity of existing systems as inhibitive characteristics. We present a concept system based upon small scale head mounted tracking and augmented reality guidance intended to mitigate these factors. A visible-spectrum stereoscopic system, able to track multiple fiducial markers to 6DoF via photogrammetry and perform semi-active speed constrained resection, was combined with a head mounted display, to provide a video-see-through augmented reality system. The accuracy of this system was investigated by probing 180 points upon a 110×110×50 mm known geometry and performing controlled resection upon a 60×60×15 mm bone phantom guided by an overlaid augmented resection guide that updated in real-time. The system produced an RMS probing accuracy and precision of 0.55±0.04 and 0.10±0.01 mm, respectively. Controlled resection resulted in an absolute resection error of 0.34±0.04 mm with a general trend of over-resection of 0.10±0.07 mm. The system was able to achieve the sub-millimetre accuracy considered necessary to successfully position unicondylar knee implants. Several refinements of the system, such as pose filtering, are expected to increase the functional volume over which this accuracy is obtained. The presented system improves upon several objections to existing commercial CAOS UKA systems, and shows great potential both within surgery itself and its training. Furthermore, it is suggested the system could be readily extended to additional orthopaedic procedures requiring accurate and intuitive guidance

Introduction. One main perceived drawback for the adoption of computer assisted orthopedic surgery (CAOS) during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) relates to the increased surgical time compared to the use of standard mechanical instrumentation [1]. This study compared the time efficiency between a next generation CAOS system (ExactechGPS®, Blue-Ortho, Grenoble, FR) and conventional mechanical instrumentation, and assessed the impact of surgeon experience level on the efficiency. Materials and methods. Surgical time was retrospectively reviewed on 63 primary TKAs performed by a board-certified orthopedic surgeon (PP) using a cemented postero-stabilized knee system (Optetrak Logic PS, Exactech, Gainesville, FL), grouped as 1) Group I (control): 21 TKAs using conventional mechanical instruments; 2) Group II: 21 TKAs performed using the CAOS system with an early experience level (first 21 cases); and 3) Group III: 21 TKAs using the CAOS system with an advanced experience level (beyond 30 cases). Surgical time was compared across the three groups (with significance defined as p<0.05). Results. Patient condition (age, BMI, gender, etc.), surgical technique, and post-operative guidelines were similar across the three groups. No cases were lost and no patient had any intra-operative complications. Compared to the TKAs using conventional mechanical instrumentation, the average surgical time for the navigated TKAs performed with an early experience was 7 minutes longer. However, with an advanced experience level, the average surgical time was 2 minutes less than the time required using conventional mechanical instrument. Further, navigated TKAs with an advanced experience level exhibited the least variability among the three groups. None of the time differences were significant (p>0.20). Discussion. No significant difference in TKA surgical time was found between the evaluated CAOS system (both within or pass the learning curve) and the conventional instrumentation. Nevertheless, once the learning curve was reached, the system decreased the time variability compared to conventional mechanical instrumentation. The comparable efficiency reported in this study to the conventional mechanical instrumentation may be attributed to the unique features of the ExactechGPS system, such as indication for use inside the sterile field, blood occlusion-resistant tracker design, customizable operative technique tailored to the surgeon's preference, and compact and reduced number of instruments

Introduction. Evaluations of Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) systems generally overlooked the intrinsic accuracy of the systems themselves, and have been largely focused on the final implant position and alignment in the reconstructed knee [1]. Although accuracy at the system-level has been assessed [2], the study method was system-specific, required a custom test bench, and the results were clinically irrelevant. As such, clinical interpolation/comparison of the results across CAOS systems or multiple studies is challenging. This study quantified and compared the system-level accuracy in the intraoperative measurements of resection alignment between two CAOS systems. Materials and Methods. Computer-assisted TKAs were performed on 10 neutral leg assemblies (MITA knee insert and trainer leg, Medial Models, Bristol, UK) using System I (5 legs, ExactechGPS®, Blue-Ortho, Grenoble, FR) and System II (5 legs, globally established manufacturer). The surgeries referenced a set of pre-defined anatomical landmarks on the inserts (small dimples). Post bone cut, the alignment parameters were collected by the CAOS systems (CAOS measured alignment). The pre- and post- operative leg surfaces were scanned, digitized, and registered (Comet L3D, Steinbichler, Plymouth, MI, USA; Geomagic, Lakewood, CO, USA; and Unigraphics NX version 7.5, Siemens PLM Software, Plano, TX, USA). The alignment parameters were measured virtually, referencing the same pre-defined anatomical landmarks (baseline). The signed and unsigned measurement errors between the baseline and CAOS measured alignment were compared between the two CAOS systems (significance defined as p<0.05), representing the magnitude of measurement errors and bias of the measurement error generated by the CAOS systems, respectively. Results. The measurement errors are presented [Table 1]. For unsigned measurement error, System II was higher in the tibial varus/valgus alignment and posterior slope (p≤0.01), and lower in the femoral varus/valgus alignment (p=0.03), compared to System I [Fig. 1]. System II exhibited higher error bias towards tibial varus alignment (up to 2.59°), more posterior slope (up to 1.41°), and more femoral hyper extension (up to 1.6°) than System I (p<0.01) [Fig. 1]. The mean signed and unsigned errors were generally less than 1°, except for System II in the measurement of tibial varus/valgus alignment (signed and unsigned mean errors=1.93°). Discussion. This study reported system-dependent bias and variability associated with intraoperative measurements of alignment parameters during TKA. The results showed that System I generally had lower variability and less bias than System II. Although the majority of the significant differences found were clinically irrelevant (<1° in means), System II was notably shown to produce on average ∼2° measurement errors in tibial varus/valgus alignment biased towards varus. Intra-operative measurement of surgical resection parameters during imageless computer-assisted TKA surgery is a critical step, in which a surgeon directly relies on the real-time data to prepare the bony resections and check the final realized cuts. Clinical-level accuracy in alignment outcomes has been shown to be system-dependent [2], this study further suggested there are differences in system-level accuracy between CAOS systems

Introduction. We report 10-year clinical outcomes of a prospective randomised controlled study on uni-compartmental knee arthroplasty using an active constraint robot. Measuring the clinical impact of CAOS systems has generally been based around surrogate radiological measures with currently few long-term functional follow-up studies reported. We present 10 year clinical follow up results of robotic vs conventional surgery in UKA. Material and methods. The initial study took place in 2004 and included 28 patients, 13 in the robotic arm and 15 in the conventional arm. All patients underwent medial compartment UKA using the ‘OXFORD’ mobile bearing knee system. Clinical outcome at 10 years was scored using the WOMAC scoring system. Results. 13 patients were initially included in the robotic arm, of these one was revised following trauma and a further two patient died leaving at total of 10 with an average age of 80 years. In the control arm, out of a total of 15 patients, 3 were revised to a total knee replacement due to pain, 1 has died and 1 lost to follow-up. Their mean age is 81. A total of 19 patients were included (conventional n=9, robotic n=10) in this follow up study. The WOMAC scores for the robotic group were lower - (p<0.05). Discussion. There is a paucity of data on 10 year outcome of computer assisted UKA and whilst most studies show no clinical benefit, our study suggests a better outcome, however our numbers now are small (n=19). In our original study 1 the primary outcome measure, tibiofemoral alignment in the coronal plane was within 2 degrees of the planned position in the robotic group whilst in the conventional group only 6 of the 15 knees achieved this level of accuracy - Fig 1. The primary hypothesis was that the use of an active constraint robot improved prosthetic position. This accuracy continues to be associated with improved functional outcome. Three revisions were performed prior to this period and were considered technical failures and have been excluded from this analysis

Introduction. Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) has been shown to assist in achieving accurate and reproducible prosthesis position and alignment during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) [1]. The most prevalent modality of navigator tracking is optical tacking, which relies on clear line-of-sight (visibility) between the localizer and the instrumented trackers attached to the patient. During surgery, the trackers may not always be optimally positioned and orientated, sometimes forcing the surgeon to move the patient's leg or adjust the camera in order to maintain tracker visibility. Limited information is known about tracker visibility under clinical settings. This study quantified the rotational limits of the trackers in a contemporary CAOS system for maintaining visibility across the surgical field. Materials and Methods. A CAOS system (ExactechGPS®, Blue-Ortho, Grenoble, FR) was set up in an operating room by a standard surgical table according to the manufacture's recommendation. A grid with 10×10 cm sized cells was placed at the quadrant of the surgical table associated with the TKA surgical field [Fig. 1A,B]. The localizer was set up to aim at the center of the grid. A TKA surgical procedure was then initiated using the CAOS system. Once the trackers-localizer connection was established, the CAOS system constantly monitored the root mean square error (RMS) of each tracker. The connection was immediately aborted if the measured RMS was above the defined threshold. Therefore, “visibility” was defined as the tracker-localizer connection with proper accuracy level. An F tracker from the tracker set (3 trackers with similar characteristics) was placed at the center of each cell by a custom fixture, facing along the +Y axis [Fig. 1]. The minimum and maximum angles of rotation around the Z axis (RAZ_MIN and RAZ_MAX) and X axis (RAX_MIN and RAX_MAX) for maintaining tracker visibility were identified. For each cell, the rotational limit of the tracker was calculated for each axis of rotation as the difference between the maximum and minimum angles (RLX and RLZ). Results. The tracker rotation limits were 144.7±3.9° for RLZ (range: 136°–152°), and 150.5±3.9° for RLX (range: 143°–158°). RLX was significantly higher than RLZ across the field (difference in means=5.8°, p<0.01). Along the X axis, the rotational limit decreased slightly for RLZ, but increased slightly for RLX [Fig. 2]. Discussion. Studies have pointed out that the need for maintaining line-of-sight can be a limitation for the use of optical tracking based CAOS systems [2,3]. The results here demonstrated that ExactechGPS provides tracker visibility for more than 135° rotation across the surgical field. Moreover, the system is placed inside the sterile field, eliminating the potential blockage of the optical localizer by the surgical staff, further ensuring tracker visibility. The slight rotational limits trends along the X axis may be due to camera placement at one side of the surgical table. The current methodology may be applied to other CAOS systems to quantify the tracker visibility in a clinical environment. To view tables/figures, please contact authors directly

Introduction. While total knee arthroplasty (TKA) improves postoperative function and relieves pain in the majority of patients with end stage osteoarthritis, its ability to restore normal knee kinematics is debated. Cadaveric studies using computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) system [1] are one of the most commonly used methods in the assessment of post-TKA knee kinematics. Commonly, these studies are performed with an open arthrotomy; which may impact the knee kinematics. The purpose of this cadaveric study was to compare the knee kinematics before and after (open or closed) arthrotomy. Materials and Methods. Kinematics of seven non-arthritic, fresh-frozen cadaveric knees (PCL presumably intact) was evaluated using a custom software application in an image-free CAOS system (ExactechGPS, Blue-Ortho, Grenoble, FR). Prior to the surgical incision, one tracker was attached to the diaphysis of each tibia and femur. Native intact knee kinematics was then assessed by performing passive range of motion (ROM) three separate times, from full extension to at least 110 degrees of flexion, with the CAOS system measuring and recording anatomical values, including flexion angle, internal-external (IE) rotation and anterior-posterior (AP) translation of the tibia relatively to the femur, and the hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle. Next, an anterior incision with a medial parapatellar arthrotomy was performed, followed by acquisition of the anatomical landmarks used for establishing an anatomical coordinate system in which all the anatomical values were evaluated [2]. The passive ROM test was then repeated with closed and then open arthrotomy (patella manually maintained in the trochlea groove). The anatomical values before and after knee arthrotomy were compared over the range of knee flexion using the native knee values as the baseline. Results. Generally, kinematics from the native knee were found to be similar to those with closed and open arthrotomy. Deviations between native knee and arthrotomy groups (open or closed, whichever was the worst case) were 0.49±0.52mm for the AP translation, 0.44±0.41° for the HKA, and 0.86±0.8° for the IE rotation (Figures 1–3). The deviation from native knee kinematics was found to be higher with increased flexion angles in both HKA and AP translation. Closing the arthrotomy had minimal effect on knee kinematics, and no difference was seen in knee kinematics between an open and closed arthrotomy, so long as the patella is manually maintained within the trochlear groove. Discussion. This study demonstrated arthrotomy, whether open or closed, did not affect the tested knee kinematics compared to a native intact knee. The deviation found in the anatomical values was within the typical range of clinical variation. Increased deviation in high flexion for some anatomical values may be due to difficulty in reproducing consistent motion during ROM test. This study showed that an open arthrotomy with the patella maintained in the trochlea groove provides accurate assessment of the intact knee kinematics

Introduction. Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) has been shown to help achieve accurate, reliable and reproducible prosthesis position and alignment during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) [1]. A typical procedure involves inputting target resection parameters at the beginning of the surgery and measuring the achieved resection after bone cuts. Across CAOS systems, software/hardware design, mechanical instrumentation, and system-dependent work flow may vary, potentially affecting the intraoperative measurement of the achieved resection. This study assessed the cumulative effect of system-dependent differences between two CAOS systems by comparing the alignment deviation between the measurement of the achieved resection and the targeted parameters. Materials and Methods. TKA resections were performed on 10 neutral whole leg assemblies (MITA knee insert and trainer leg, Medial Models, Bristol, UK) by a board-certified orthopaedic surgeon (BH) using System I (5 legs, ExactechGPS®, Blue-Ortho, Grenoble, FR) and System II (5 legs, globally established manufacturer). The surgeon was deemed as “experienced” user (>30 surgeries) with both systems. The target parameters for the TKA resections, as well as major differences between the two systems are summarized in Table 1A. The deviations of the intraoperative alignment measurements on the achieved distal femoral and proximal tibial resection from the target were calculated and compared between the two systems with significance defined as p<0.05. Results. The alignment deviations (signed and unsigned) are presented in Table 1B. On average, System II had significantly higher deviation towards varus (2.2°) than System I (0.83° valgus) for the tibia (p<0.01) [Table 1B]. System I tended to measure slightly more in flexion (∼1°) than System II (∼0.5° extension) (p=0.03). System I demonstrated lower variability of the signed deviation (SD) than System II in tibial varus/valgus alignment, femoral flexion/extension, and femoral varus/valgus alignment [Fig. 1]. No significant differences were found in between systems in the unsigned errors. Both systems had measurement within the perceived acceptable range (within 3°) [2,3]. Discussion. Intraoperative measurement of the achieved TKA resections is important as it allows for intraoperative adjustment if the resections are not deemed suitable. Assuming a consistent surgical variability exhibited by the same surgeon with equal experience on both systems, this study demonstrated that some systems (System II) may have higher variability than others (System I), and exhibit clinically meaningful bias (tibial varus/valgus) while achieving or quantifying the resections. The variability may be caused by the cumulated effect of the differences between the two systems [see Table 1A]. As clinical alignment accuracy has been found to be system-dependent in a previous study [4], and archived resection parameters in the surgical report has been used as key inputs in relevant studies [5], the results here emphasizes the importance of taking into account the specific CAOS system in both clinical application and CAOS research. To view tables/figures, please contact authors directly

Introduction. Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS) provides great value in ensuring accurate, reliable and reproducible total knee arthroplasty (TKA) outcomes [1,2]. Depending on surgeon preferences or patient factors (e.g. BMI, ligament condition, and individual joint anatomy), resection planning (guided adjustment of cutting blocks) is performed with different knee flexion, abduction/adduction (ABD/ADD) and internal/external (I/E) rotation angles, potentially leading to measurement errors in the planned resections due to a modified tracker/localizer spatial relationship. This study assessed the variation in the intraoperative measurement of the planned resection due to leg manipulation during TKA, and identified the leg position variables (flexion, ABD/ADD, and I/E rotation) contributing to the variability. Materials and Methods. Computer-assisted TKA (ExactechGPS®, Blue-Ortho, Grenoble, FR) was performed on a neutral whole leg assembly (MITA knee insert and trainer leg, Medial Models, Bristol, UK) by a board-certified orthopaedic surgeon (BH) at his preferred leg flexion, ABD/ADD, and I/E rotation angles. A cutting block was adjusted and fixed to the tibia, targeting the resection parameters listed in Table 1A. An instrumented resection checker was then attached to the cutting block to measure the planned resection at the same leg position (baseline). Next, the surgeon moved the leg to 9 sampled positions, representing typical leg position/orientation associated with different steps during TKA [Table 1B]. The planned resection was tracked by the CAOS system at each leg position. Tibial resection parameters at each sampled position were compared to the baseline. Regression was performed to identify the variables (flexion, ABD/ADD, I/E rotation) that significantly contribute to the measured variation (p<0.05). Results. The resection parameters at the baseline leg position are presented (see Table 1A). Clinically negligible variations were found across the 9 positions [Table 1B], with mean errors ≤0.1mm in resection depths and ≤0.2° in alignment parameters. For this particular system analyzed, leg flexion strongly correlated with the measurement errors in medial resection depths (p≤0.01, R2=0.76), lateral resection depth (p=0.01, R2=0.61) and posterior slope (p<0.01, R2=0.92) [Fig. 1]. The system tended to measure less in resection depths and posterior slope with an increased leg flexion [Fig. 1]. No other statistical significance was found (N.S.). Discussion. The results here showed that ExactechGPS can provide robust measurements of the planned resection parameters during TKA, independent of the ABD/ADD and I/E rotation of the knee. Although for the system studied, measurement errors strongly correlated with leg flexion, the magnitude of the errors was clinically negligible (within ±0.5 mm/° at a confidence level of 95%) [Table 1B]. Although CAOS systems have been evaluated for accuracy in the spatial distance measurement and clinical alignment outcomes [2,3], the measurement accuracy of planned resection parameters due to change of leg position remains unknown, even though it directly impacts the final resection. This study provided an improved understanding of clinical variability on the measurement of planned TKA resection when using a CAOS system

Aim: To compare between the number of steps and instruments required for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using 3 different techniques. The proposed techniques were conventional technique, conventional technique with patient-specific pin locators and CAOS technique using patient-specific templates (PST). Patients and methods: Zimmer/Nexgen was used as the standard implant and templating system for TKA. A Comparison was done on the number of steps and instruments required for TKA when performed with conventional technique, conventional technique with patient-specific pin locators and CAOS technique with patient-specific templates (PST) used as cutting guides. Results: The essential steps and instruments required for conventional TKA without surgical approach or bone exposure were average 70 steps with 183 different instruments; for conventional technique with patient-specific pin locators, they were average 20 steps with 40 instruments and two templates; for CAOS technique using PST, they were average 10 steps with two templates and 15 accessory instruments. CAOS PST technique required an average of 4 days for preoperative preparation and templates fabrication. Conclusion: CAOS technique using PST could make TKA less complicated in light of essential steps and instrumentation required. Although this technique required accurate preoperative preparation, it could offer less technical errors and shorter operative time compared to conventional TKA techniques. The errors’ rate for each technique was still depending on the surgeon's skills and training; however, CAOS technique with PST required shorter learning curve