Imageless computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty provides superior short term functional outcomes: A meta-analysis

Journal of Arthroplasty

Volumn 29, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 938-944

  Rebal, Brett A ^a   Babatunde, Oladapo M ^a   Lee, Jonathan H ^a   Geller, Jeffrey A ^a   Patrick, David A ^a   Macaulay, William ^a  

^a NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Arthroplasty; Computer navigation; Knee; Meta analysis; Total knee replacement

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; FOLLOW UP; FUNCTIONAL STATUS; HUMAN; KNEE; KNEE SOCIETY SCORE; LEG; META ANALYSIS; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SURGICAL NAVIGATION SYSTEM; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT;

ARTHROPLASTY; COMPUTER NAVIGATION; KNEE; META-ANALYSIS; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT;

ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84899086864     PISSN: 08835403     EISSN: 15328406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.09.018     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Leitner F., et al. Computer-assisted knee surgical total replacement. Lecture notes in computer science, CVRMed-MRCAS '97: First Joint Conference Computer Vision, Virtual Reality and Robotics in Medicine and Medical Robotics and Computer-Assisted Surgery, Grenoble, France, March 19-22, 1997: proceedings 1997, 629. Springer, Berlin. J. Troccaz, E. Grimson, R. Mösges (Eds.).
2. Delp S.L., et al. Computer assisted knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998, 354:49.
3. Krackow K.A., et al. A new technique for determining proper mechanical axis alignment during total knee arthroplasty: progress toward computer-assisted TKA. Orthopedics 1999, 22(7):698.
4. Buehler K.C. Computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty: the state of the art in 2008 - experience with Stryker Knee Nav in fixed bearing total knee arthroplasty. Tech Knee Surg 2008, 7(3):153.
5. Picard F., Gregori A., Leitner F. Computer assisted total knee arthroplasty: validation of the image free concept 2007, Pro Business, Berlin, Germany.
6. Siston R.A., et al. Surgical navigation for total knee arthroplasty: a perspective. J Biomech 2007, 40(4):728.
7. Barrett W.P., et al. Comparison of radiographic alignment of imageless computer-assisted surgery vs conventional instrumentation in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2011, 26(8):1273.
8. Bauwens K., et al. Navigated total knee replacement. A meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007, 89(2):261.
9. Hetaimish B.M., et al. Meta-analysis of navigation vs conventional total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2012, 27(6):1177.
10. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 2011, The Cochrane Collaboration, [updated March 2011] Available from. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org, J.P.T. Higgins, S. Green (Eds.).
11. Moher D., et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol 2009, 62(10):1006.
12. Babazadeh S., et al. Joint line position correlates with function after primary total knee replacement: a randomised controlled trial comparing conventional and computer-assisted surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011, 93(9):1223.
13. Yang J.H., et al. Clinical and radiologic outcomes of contemporary 3 techniques of TKA. Orthopedics 2010, 33(10 Suppl):76.
14. Lutzner J., Gunther K.P., Kirschner S. Functional outcome after computer-assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2010, 18(10):1339.
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(4):560.
16. Mullaji A., et al. Comparison of limb and component alignment using computer-assisted navigation versus image intensifier-guided conventional total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, single-surgeon study of 467 knees. J Arthroplasty 2007, 22(7):953.
17. Mombert M., et al. Navigated total knee arthroplasty: a radiological analysis of 42 randomised cases. Acta Orthop Belg 2007, 73(1):49.
18. Hart R., et al. Total knee arthroplasty implanted with and without kinematic navigation. Int Orthop 2003, 27(6):366.
19. Bejek Z., et al. Gait analysis following TKA: comparison of conventional technique, computer-assisted navigation and minimally invasive technique combined with computer-assisted navigation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011, 19(2):285.
20. O'Connor M.I., et al. Fat emboli in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study of computer-assisted navigation vs standard surgical technique. J Arthroplasty 2010, 25(7):1034.
21. Ooi L.H., et al. Does computer-assisted surgical navigation total knee arthroplasty reduce venous thromboembolism compared with conventional total knee arthroplasty?. Singapore Med J 2008, 49(8):610.
22. Church J.S., et al. Embolic phenomena during computer-assisted and conventional total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007, 89(4):481.
23. Kalairajah Y., et al. Are systemic emboli reduced in computer-assisted knee surgery? A prospective, randomised, clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006, 88(2):198.
24. Han H.S., et al. Rotational alignment of femoral components in total knee arthroplasty: nonimage-based navigation system versus conventional technique. Orthopedics 2006, 29(10 Suppl):S148.
25. Conteduca F., et al. Blood loss in computer-assisted mobile bearing total knee arthroplasty. A comparison of computer-assisted surgery with a conventional technique. Int Orthop 2009, 33(6):1609.
26. Kalairajah Y., et al. Blood loss after total knee replacement: effects of computer-assisted surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005, 87(11):1480.
27. van Strien T., et al. Computer assisted versus conventional cemented total knee prostheses alignment accuracy and micromotion of the tibial component. Int Orthop 2009, 33(5):1255.
28. Park S.E., Lee C.T. Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional manual implantation of a primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2007, 22(7):1054.
29. Victor J., Hoste D. Image-based computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty leads to lower variability in coronal alignment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004, 428:131.
30. Hernandez-Vaquero D., et al. Computer assistance increases precision of component placement in total knee arthroplasty with articular deformity. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010, 468(5):1237.
31. Oberst M., et al. CT analysis after navigated versus conventional implantation of TKA. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2008, 128(6):561.
32. Martin A., et al. Imageless navigation for TKA increases implantation accuracy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007, 460:178.
33. Hsu W.H., Hsu R.W., Weng Y.J. Effect of preoperative deformity on postoperative leg axis in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2010, 18(10):1323.
34. Bejek Z., Solyom L., Szendroi M. Experiences with computer navigated total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 2007, 31(5):617.
35. Stulberg S.D., Picard F., Saragaglia D. Computer-assisted total knee replacement arthroplasty. Oper Tech Orthop 2000, 10(1):25.
36. Choi W.C., et al. Plain radiograph fails to reflect the alignment and advantages of navigation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2011, 26(5):756.
37. Hoppe S., et al. More accurate component alignment in navigated total knee arthroplasty has no clinical benefit at 5-year follow-up. Acta Orthop 2012, 83(6):629.
38. Keyes B.J., Markel D.C., Meneghini R.M. Evaluation of limb alignment, component positioning, and function in primary total knee arthroplasty using a pinless navigation technique compared with conventional methods. J Knee Surg 2012, 1.
39. Spencer J.M., et al. Computer navigation versus conventional total knee replacement: no difference in functional results at two years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007, 89(4):477.
40. Huang N.F., et al. Coronal alignment correlates with outcome after total knee arthroplasty: five-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplasty 2012, 27(9):1737.
41. Chauhan S.K., et al. Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty versus a conventional jig-based technique. A randomised, prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004, 86(3):372.
42. Macule-Beneyto F., et al. Navigation in total knee arthroplasty. A multicenter study. Int Orthop 2006, 30(6):536.
43. Blakeney W.G., Khan R.J., Wall S.J. Computer-assisted techniques versus conventional guides for component alignment in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011, 93(15):1377.
44. Chin P.L., et al. Randomized control trial comparing radiographic total knee arthroplasty implant placement using computer navigation versus conventional technique. J Arthroplasty 2005, 20(5):618.
45. Decking R., et al. Leg axis after computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized trial comparing computer-navigated and manual implantation. J Arthroplasty 2005, 20(3):282.
46. Decking R., et al. On the outcome of computer-assisted total knee replacement. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 2007, 74(3):171.
47. Dutton A.Q., et al. Computer-assisted minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty compared with standard total knee arthroplasty. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008, 90(1):2.
48. Ensini A., et al. Alignments and clinical results in conventional and navigated total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007, 457:156.
49. Harvie P., Sloan K., Beaver R.J. Three-dimensional component alignment and functional outcome in computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized study comparing two navigation systems. J Arthroplasty 2011, 26(8):1285.
50. Lee D.H., et al. Accuracy of soft tissue balancing in TKA: comparison between navigation-assisted gap balancing and conventional measured resection. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2010, 18(3):381.
51. Luring C., et al. Minimal invasive and computer assisted total knee replacement compared with the conventional technique: a prospective, randomised trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2008, 16(10):928.
52. Lutzner J., et al. Computer-assisted and conventional total knee replacement: a comparative, prospective, randomised study with radiological and CT evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008, 90(8):1039.
53. Matziolis G., 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(2):236.
54. Pang H.N., et al. Computer-assisted gap balancing technique improves outcome in total knee arthroplasty, compared with conventional measured resection technique. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011, 19(9):1496.
55. Schmitt J., et al. Navigation of total knee arthroplasty: rotation of components and clinical results in a prospectively randomized study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2011, 12:16.
56. Seon J.K., et al. Functional comparison of total knee arthroplasty performed with and without a navigation system. Int Orthop 2009, 33(4):987.
57. Stockl B., et al. Navigation improves accuracy of rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004, 426:180.
58. Zhang X.L., Zhang W., Shao J.J. Rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty: nonimage-based navigation system versus conventional technique. Chin Med J (Engl) 2012, 125(2):236.
59. Hiscox C.M., et al. Randomized trial of computer-assisted knee arthroplasty: impact on clinical and radiographic outcomes. J Arthroplasty 2011, 26(8):1259.
60. Valentine J.C., Pigott T.D., Rothstein H.R. How many studies do you need? A primer on statistical power for meta-analysis. J Educ Behav Stat 2010, 35(2):215.
61. Harvie P., Sloan K., Beaver R.J. Computer navigation vs conventional total knee arthroplasty: five-year functional results of a prospective randomized trial. J Arthroplasty 2012, 27(5):667.
62. Jacobs C.A., Christensen C.P. Correlations between knee society function scores and functional force measures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009, 467(9):2414.
63. Xie C., et al. Clinical outcomes after computer-assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 2012, 35(5):e647.
64. Zamora L.A., et al. Systematic review of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty. ANZ J Surg 2013, 83(1-2):22.
65. Novak E.J., Silverstein M.D., Bozic K.J. The cost-effectiveness of computer-assisted navigation in total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007, 89(11):2389.
66. Jeffery R.S., Morris R.W., Denham R.A. Coronal alignment after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1991, 73(5):709.
67. Parratte S., et al. Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on the fifteen-year survival of modern, cemented total knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010, 92(12):2143.
68. Bonner T.J., et al. The effect of post-operative mechanical axis alignment on the survival of primary total knee replacements after a follow-up of 15years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011, 93(9):1217.
69. Stulberg S.D., Yaffe M.A., Koo S.S. Computer-assisted surgery versus manual total knee arthroplasty: a case-controlled study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006, 88(Suppl 4):47.
70. Lingard E.A., et al. Validity and responsiveness of the Knee Society Clinical Rating System in comparison with the SF-36 and WOMAC. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001, 83-A(12):1856.
71. Noble P.C., et al. Development of a new Knee Society scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012, 470(1):20.
72. Matsuda S., et al. Postoperative alignment and ROM affect patient satisfaction after TKA knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013, 471(1):127.
73. Schaller R. Moore's law: past, present and future. IEEE Spectr 1997, 34(6):52.