Is the use of computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty improving implant positioning and function? A comparative study of 198 knees operated at a Norwegian district hospital

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Ove Furnes³  Truls Jellestad⁴  Svein Halvorsen¹  Tor Egil Sørås²  Anne Marie Fenstad²  Stein Håkon Låstad Lygre⁵  Øystein Gøthesen³  Gro Sævik Dyrhovden³ 

[1] Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway;The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway;Departement of Clinical Medicine 2, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway;Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Lærdal Hospital, Helse Førde HF, Lærdal, Norway;Department of Occupational Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway

关键词: Quality of life;    EQ-5D;    KOOS;    Total knee arthroplasty;    Computer navigation;   

Others  :  1129166
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2474-14-321

 received in 2013-06-24, accepted in 2013-11-12,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

There are few Scandinavian studies on the effect of computer assisted orthopedic surgery (CAOS) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), compared to conventional technique (CON), and there is little information on effects in pain and function scores. This retrospective study has evaluated the effects of CAOS on radiological parameters and pain, function and quality of life after primary TKA.

Methods

198 primary TKAs were operated by one surgeon in two district hospitals; 103 CAOS and 95 CON. The groups were evaluated based on 3 months post-operative radiographs and a questionnaire containing the knee osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), the EQ-5D index score and a visual analogue scale (VAS) two years after surgery. Multiple linear regression method was used to investigate possible impact from exposure (CON or CAOS).

Results

On hip-knee-ankle radiographs, 20% of measurements were > ±3° of neutral in the CAOS group and 25% in the CON group (p = 0.37). For the femoral component, the number was 5% for CAOS and 18% for CON (p < 0.01). For the tibial component, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.58). In the sagittal plane, the surgeon tended to apply more femoral flexion and more posterior tibial slope with CAOS. We observed no statistically or clinically significant difference in KOOS score, VAS or ∆EQ-5D (all p values >0.05), but there was a trend towards better scores for CAOS. Operation time was 3 minutes longer for CON (p = 0.37).

Conclusions

CAOS can improve radiological measurements in primary TKA, and makes it possible to adjust component placement to the patient’s anatomy. Over-all, the two methods are equal in pain, function and quality-of-life scores.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Dyrhovden et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Krackow KA, Bayers-Thering M, Phillips MJ, Mihalko WM: A new technique for determining proper mechanical axis alignment during total knee arthroplasty: progress toward computer-assisted TKA. Orthopedics 1999, 22:698-702.
• [2]Bathis H, Perlick L, Tingart M, Luring C, Zurakowski D, Grifka J: Alignment in total knee arthroplasty A comparison of computer-assisted surgery with the conventional technique. The J of bone and joint surgery British volume 2004, 86:682-687.
• [3]Jeffery RS, Morris RW, Denham RA: Coronal alignment after total knee replacement. The J of bone and joint surgery British volume 1991, 73:709-714.
• [4]Rand JA, Coventry MB: Ten-year evaluation of geometric total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988, 232:168-173.
• [5]Brin YS, Nikolaou VS, Joseph L, Zukor DJ, Antoniou J: Imageless computer assisted versus conventional total knee replacement. A Bayesian meta-analysis of 23 comparative studies. Int Orthop 2011, 35:331-339.
• [6]Gothesen 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.
• [7]Carter RE 3rd, Rush PF, Smid JA, Smith WL: Experience with computer-assisted navigation for total knee arthroplasty in a community setting. J Arthroplasty 2008, 23:707-713.
• [8]Maniar RN, Johorey AC, Pujary CT, Yadava AN: Margin of error in alignment: a study undertaken when converting from conventional to computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. The J of arthroplasty 2011, 26:82-87.
• [9]Nerhus TK, Heir S, Thornes E, Madsen JE, Ekeland A: Time-dependent improvement in functional outcome following LCS rotating platform knee replacement. Acta orthopaedica 2010, 81:727-732.
• [10]Brouwer RW, Jakma TS, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Ginai AZ, Verhaar JA: The whole leg radiograph: standing versus supine for determining axial alignment. Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica 2003, 74:565-568.
• [11]Paley D, Herzenberg JE: Principles of deformity correction. Berlin: Springer; 2002.
• [12]Moreland JR, Bassett LW, Hanker GJ: Radiographic analysis of the axial alignment of the lower extremity. The J of bone and joint surgery American volume 1987, 69:745-749.
• [13]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. The J of bone and joint surgery American volume 2009, 91:14-19.
• [14]Charnley J: The long-term results of low-friction arthroplasty of the hip performed as a primary intervention. The J of bone and joint surgery British volume 1972, 54:61-76.
• [15]Dunbar MJ, Robertsson O, Ryd L: What's all that noise? The effect of co-morbidity on health outcome questionnaire results after knee arthroplasty. Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica 2004, 75:119-126.
• [16]Greiner W, Weijnen T, Nieuwenhuizen M, Oppe S, Badia X, Busschbach J, Buxton M, Dolan P, Kind P, Krabbe P, et al.: A single European currency for EQ-5D health states Results from a six-country study. The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care 2003, 4:222-231.
• [17]Brooks R: EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996, 37:53-72.
• [18]Roos EM, Lohmander LS: The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): from joint injury to osteoarthritis. Health and quality of life outcomes 2003, 1:64. BioMed Central Full Text
• [19]Ehrich EW, Davies GM, Watson DJ, Bolognese JA, Seidenberg BC, Bellamy N: Minimal perceptible clinical improvement with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index questionnaire and global assessments in patients with osteoarthritis. The J of rheumatology 2000, 27:2635-2641.
• [20]Roos EM, Toksvig-Larsen S: Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) - validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement. Health and quality of life outcomes 2003, 1:17. BioMed Central Full Text
• [21]Lygre SH, Espehaug B, Havelin LI, Furnes O, Vollset SE: Pain and function in patients after primary unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty. The J of bone and joint surgery American volume 2010, 92:2890-2897.
• [22]Shrout PE, Fleiss JL: Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979, 86:420-428.
• [23]Paradowski PT, Bergman S, Sunden-Lundius A, Lohmander LS, Roos EM: Knee complaints vary with age and gender in the adult population. Population-based reference data for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). BMC musculoskeletal disorders 2006, 7:38. BioMed Central Full Text
• [24]Huang NF, Dowsey MM, Ee E, Stoney JD, Babazadeh S, Choong PF: Coronal alignment correlates with outcome after total knee arthroplasty: five-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. The J of arthroplasty 2012, 27:1737-1741.
• [25]Sultan PG, Most E, Schule S, Li G, Rubash HE: Optimizing flexion after total knee arthroplasty: advances in prosthetic design. Clinical orthopaedics and related research 2003, 416:167-173.
• [26]Bellemans J, Robijns F, Duerinckx J, Banks S, Vandenneucker H: The influence of tibial slope on maximal flexion after total knee arthroplasty. Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official j of the ESSKA 2005, 13:193-196.
• [27]Seon JK, Park SJ, Lee KB, Li G, Kozanek M, Song EK: Functional comparison of total knee arthroplasty performed with and without a navigation system. International orthopaedics 2009, 33:987-990.
• [28]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. The J of bone and joint surgery British volume 2007, 89:477-480.
• [29]Chauhan SK, Clark GW, Lloyd S, Scott RG, Breidahl W, Sikorski JM: Computer-assisted total knee replacement. A controlled cadaver study using a multi-parameter quantitative CT assessment of alignment (the Perth CT Protocol). The J of bone and joint surgery British volume 2004, 86:818-823.
• [30]Slover JD, Tosteson AN, Bozic KJ, Rubash HE, Malchau H: Impact of hospital volume on the economic value of computer navigation for total knee replacement. The J of bone and joint surgery American volume 2008, 90:1492-1500.
• [31]Chauhan SK, Scott RG, Breidahl W, Beaver RJ: Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty versus a conventional jig-based technique. A randomised, prospective trial. The J of bone and joint surgery British volume 2004, 86:372-377.