Comparison of radiographic alignment of imageless computer-assisted surgery vs conventional instrumentation in primary total knee arthroplasty

Journal of Arthroplasty

Volumn 26, Issue 8, 2011, Pages

  Barrett, William P ^a   Mason, J Bohannon ^b   Moskal, Joseph T ^c   Dalury, David F ^d   Oliashirazi, Ali ^e   Fisher, David A ^f  

^a Valley Orthopedic Associates   (United States)

^b ORTHOCAROLINA HIP AND KNEE CENTER   (United States)

^c VIRGINIA TECH CARILION SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d Towson Orthopaedics Associates   (United States)

^e MARSHALL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^f ORTHOINDY   (United States)

Author keywords

Conventional instrumentation; Imageless computer assisted surgery; Total knee arthroplasty

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; KNEE INJURY; KNEE RADIOGRAPHY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; MULTICENTER STUDY; PERIOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; RADIOGRAPHIC ALIGNMENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCORING SYSTEM; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; SURGICAL RISK; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WALKING;

EID: 80755128494     PISSN: 08835403     EISSN: 15328406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.04.037     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Berend M.E., Ritter M.A., Meding J.B., et al. Tibial component failure mechanisms in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004, 26.
2. Brys D.A., Lombardi A.V., Mallory T.H., et al. A comparison of intramedullary and extramedullary alignment systems for tibial component placement in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1991, 175.
3. Ritter M.A., Faris P.M., Keating E.M., et al. Postoperative alignment of total knee replacement. Its effect on survival. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1994, 153.
4. Bargren J.H., Blaha J.D., Freeman M.A. Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Correlated biomechanical and clinical observations. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1983, 178.
5. Lotke P.A., Ecker M.L. Influence of positioning of prosthesis in total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1977, 59:77.
6. Yau W.P., Chiu K.Y., Zuo J.L., et al. Computer navigation did not improve alignment in a lower-volume total knee practice. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008, 466:935.
7. Hvid I., Nielsen S. Total condylar knee arthroplasty. Prosthetic component positioning and radiolucent lines. Acta Orthop Scand 1984, 55:160.
8. Insall J.N., Binazzi R., Soudry M., et al. Total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1985, 13.
9. Jeffery R.S., Morris R.W., Denham R.A. Coronal alignment after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1991, 73-B:709.
10. Bathis H., Perlick L., Tingart M., et al. CT-free computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty versus the conventional technique: radiographic results of 100 cases. Orthopedics 2004, 27:476.
11. Mahaluxmivala J., Bankes M.J., Nicolai P., et al. The effect of surgeon experience on component positioning in 673 press fit condylar posterior cruciate-sacrificing total knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty 2001, 16:635.
12. Petersen T.L., Engh G.A. Radiographic assessment of knee alignment after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1988, 3:67.
13. Goldberg V.M., Kraay M. The outcome of the cementless tibial component: a minimum 14-year clinical evaluation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004, 214.
14. Hood R.W., Vanni M., Insall J.N. The correction of knee alignment in 225 consecutive total condylar knee replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1981, 94.
15. Choong P.F., Dowsey M.M., Stoney J.D. Does accurate anatomical alignment result in better function and quality of life? Comparing conventional and computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009, 24:560.
16. Bathis H., Perlick L., Tingart M., et al. Alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of computer-assisted surgery with the conventional technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004, 86-B:682.
17. Chauhan S.K., Scott R.G., Breidahl W., et al. Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty versus a conventional jig-based technique: a randomised, prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004, 86-B:372.
18. Carter R.E., Rush P.F., Smid J.A., et al. Experience with computer-assisted navigation for total knee arthroplasty in a community setting. J Arthroplasty 2008, 23:707.
19. Kim Y.H., Kim J.S., Yoon S.H. Alignment and orientation of the components in total knee replacement with and without navigation support: a prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007, 89-B:471.
20. Bonutti P.M., Dethmers D.A., McGrath M.S., et al. Navigation did not improve the precision of minimally invasive knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008, 466:2730.
21. Dutton A.Q., Yeo S.J. Computer-assisted minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty compared with standard total knee arthroplasty. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009, 91(Suppl 2 Pt 1):116.
22. Kim Y.H., Kim J.S., Choi Y., et al. Computer-assisted surgical navigation does not improve the alignment and orientation of the components in total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009, 91:14.
23. Macule-Beneyto F., Hernandez-Vaquero D., Segur-Vilalta J.M., et al. Navigation in total knee arthroplasty. A multicenter study. Int Orthop 2006, 30:536.
24. Molfetta L., Caldo D. Computer navigation versus conventional implantation for varus knee total arthroplasty: a case-control study at 5 years follow-up. Knee 2008, 15:75.
25. Jenny J.Y., Clemens U., Kohler S., et al. Consistency of implantation of a total knee arthroplasty with a non-image-based navigation system: a case-control study of 235 cases compared with 235 conventionally implanted prostheses. J Arthroplasty 2005, 20:832.
26. Matziolis G., Krocker D., Weiss U., et al. A prospective, randomized study of computer-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty. three-dimensional evaluation of implant alignment and rotation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007, 89:236.
27. Mason J.B., Fehring T.K., Estok R., et al. Meta-analysis of alignment outcomes in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty 2007, 22:1097.
28. Longstaff L.M., Sloan K., Stamp N., et al. Good alignment after total knee arthroplasty leads to faster rehabilitation and better function. J Arthroplasty 2009, 24:570.
29. Seon J.K., Song E.K. Functional impact of navigation-assisted minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 2005, 28(10 Suppl):s1251.
30. Bonutti P.M., Dethmers D., Ulrich S.D., et al. Computer navigation-assisted versus minimally invasive TKA: benefits and drawbacks. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008, 466:2756.
31. Jenny J.Y., Miehlke R.K., Giurea A. Learning curve in navigated total knee replacement. A multi-centre study comparing experienced and beginner centres. Knee 2008, 15:80.
32. Jenny J.Y., Boeri C. Computer-assisted implantation of total knee prostheses: a case-control comparative study with classical instrumentation. Comput Aided Surg 2001, 6:217.
33. Kamat Y.D., Aurakzai K.M., Adhikari A.R., et al. Does computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty improve patient outcome at midterm follow-up?. Int Orthop 2009, 33:1567.
34. Bal B.S., Greenberg D., Li S., et al. Tibial post failures in a condylar posterior cruciate substituting total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2008, 23:650.
35. Barrack R.L., Nakamura S.J., Hopkins S.G., et al. Winner of the 2003 James A. Rand young investigator's award: early failure of cementless mobile-bearing total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2004, 19(7, Supplement 2):101.
36. Peters C.L., Erickson J., Kloepper R.G., et al. Revision total knee arthroplasty with modular components inserted with metaphyseal cement and stems without cement. J Arthroplasty 2005, 20:302.
37. Spencer J.M., Chauhan S.K., Sloan K., et al. Computer navigation versus conventional total knee replacement: no difference in functional results at two years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007, 89-B:477.