Functional outcome and alignment in computer-assisted and conventionally operated total knee replacements: A multicentre parallel-group randomised controlled trial

Bone and Joint Journal

Volumn 96 B, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 609-618

  Gothesen O ^a,b   Espehaug, B ^b   Havelin, L I ^b   Petursson, G ^b,c   Hallan, G ^b   Strom E ^b   Dyrhovden, G ^b,d   Furnes, O ^b  

^a HAUGESUND HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^b HAUKELAND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^c LOVISENBERG DIAKONALE HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KNEE INJURY AND OSTEOARTHRITIS OUTCOME SCORE; KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS; KNEE PROSTHESIS; KNEE SOCIETY SCORE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VERY ELDERLY;

ALIGNMENT; ARTHROPLASTY; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; COMPUTER NAVIGATION; FUNCTION; RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; BONE MALALIGNMENT; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; KNEE JOINT; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS, KNEE; PROSTHESIS FITTING; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84900523500     PISSN: 20494394     EISSN: 20494408     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B5.32516     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Robertsson O, Dunbar M, Pehrsson T, Knutson K, Lidgren L. Patient satisfaction after knee arthroplasty: a report on 27,372 knees operated on between 1981 and 1995 in Sweden. Acta Orthop Scand 2000;71:262-267. (Pubitemid 30648930)
2. Carr AJ, Robertsson O, Graves S, et al. Knee replacement. Lancet 2012;379:1331-1340.
3. Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KD. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010;468:57-63.
4. Bäthis 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:682-687. (Pubitemid 39077216)
5. Chauhan SK, Scott RG, Breidahl W, Beaver RJ. Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty versus a conventional jig-based technique. A randomised, prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2004;86-B:372-377. (Pubitemid 38559489)
6. Lüring C, Bäthis H, Tingart M, Perlick L, Grifka J. Computer assistance in total knee replacement - a critical assessment of current health care technology. Comput Aided Surg 2006;11:77-80. (Pubitemid 43932725)
7. Cheng T, Zhao S, Peng X, Zhang X. Does computer-assisted surgery improve postoperative leg alignment and implant positioning following total knee arthroplasty? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012;20:1307-1322.
8. Bauwens K, Matthes G, Wich M, et al. Navigated total knee replacement. A meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2007;89-A:261-269. (Pubitemid 46214342)
9. Kim YH, Kim JS, Choi Y, Kwon OR. 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-A:14-19.
10. Longstaff LM, Sloan K, Stamp N, Scaddan M, Beaver R. Good alignment after total knee arthroplasty leads to faster rehabilitation and better function. J Arthroplasty 2009;24:570-578.
11. Parratte S, Pagnano MW, Trousdale RT, Berry DJ. Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on the fifteen-year survival of modern, cemented total knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2010;92-A:2143-2149.
12. Bellemans J. Neutral mechanical alignment: a requirement for successful TKA: opposes. Orthopedics 2011;34:507-509.
13. Choong PF, Dowsey MM, Stoney JD. Does accurate anatomical alignment result in better function and quality of life? Comparing conventional and computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009;24:560-569.
14. Fehring TK, Odum S, Griffin WL, Mason JB, Nadaud M. Early failures in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;392:315-318. (Pubitemid 33054961)
15. Ritter MA, Faris PM, Keating EM, Meding JB. Postoperative alignment of total knee replacement. Its effect on survival. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1994;299:153-156. (Pubitemid 24051713)
16. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010;340:332.
17. Dripps RD. New classification of physical status. Anesthesiol 1963;24:111.
18. Dennis DA, Komistek RD, Kim RH, Sharma A. Gap balancing versus measured resection technique for total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010;468:102-107.
19. Whiteside LA, Arima J. The anteroposterior axis for femoral rotational alignment in valgus total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1995;321:168-172.
20. Whiteside LA. Soft tissue balancing: the knee. J Arthroplasty 2002;17 (4 Suppl 1):23-27. (Pubitemid 34663218)
21. Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989;248:13-14. (Pubitemid 20204775)
22. Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) - development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1998;28:88-96. (Pubitemid 28366508)
23. EuroQol Group. EuroQol - a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990;16:199-208.
24. Roos EM, Lohmander LS. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): from joint injury to osteoarthritis. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003;1:64.
25. Charnley J. The long-term results of low-friction arthroplasty of the hip performed as a primary intervention. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1972;54-B:61-76.
26. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979;86:420-428.
27. Harvie P, Sloan K, Beaver RJ. Computer navigation vs conventional total knee arthroplasty: five-year functional results of a prospective randomized trial. J Arthroplasty 2012;27:667-672.
28. Barrack RL, Schrader T, Bertot AJ, Wolfe MW, Myers L. Component rotation and anterior knee pain after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;392:46-55. (Pubitemid 33054928)
29. Luring C, Perlick L, Bäthis H, Tingart M, Grifka J. The effect of femoral component rotation on patellar tracking in total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 2007;30:965-967.
30. Shi X, Shen B, Kang P, et al. The effect of posterior tibial slope on knee flexion in posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013;21:2696-2703.
31. Berger RA, Crossett LS, Jacobs JJ, Rubash HE. Malrotation causing patellofemoral complications after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998;356:144-153. (Pubitemid 29019483)
32. Kim YH, Park JW, Kim JS. Computer-navigated versus conventional total knee arthroplasty a prospective randomized trial. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2012;94-A:2017-2024.
33. Chauhan SK, Clark GW, Lloyd S, et al. Computer-assisted total knee replacement. A controlled cadaver study using a multi-parameter quantitative CT assessment of alignment (the Perth CT Protocol). J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2004;86-B:818-823. (Pubitemid 39173467)
34. Spencer JM, Chauhan SK, Sloan K, Taylor A, Beaver RJ. Computer navigation versus conventional total knee replacement: no difference in functional results at two years. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2007;89-B:477-480. (Pubitemid 46851126)
35. Jeffery RS, Morris RW, Denham RA. Coronal alignment after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1991;73-B:709-714.
36. Sikorski JM. Alignment in total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2008;90-B:1121-1127.
37. Gøthesen O, Espehaug B, Havelin L, Petursson G, Furnes O. Short-term outcome of 1,465 computer-navigated primary total knee replacements 2005-2008. Acta Orthop 2011;82:293-300.