Literature DB >> 16237558

[Is computer navigation a useful tool in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty? A pilot cadaver study].

P R Aldinger1, H S Gill, U Schlegel, M Schneider, M Clauss, J W Goodfellow, D W Murray, S J Breusch.   

Abstract

We conducted this pilot cadaver study to investigate whether the use of a navigation system during minimally invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty leads to more consistent results than the conventional hand-guided technique. We describe the accuracy of implant positioning in using standard instrumentation and computer navigation. Radiographic assessment showed that accurate component placement was achieved using both methods. These results were not statistically significant. The computer navigated femoral component placement without intramedullary (IM) rod was as accurate as the conventional method with IM rod. The study showed that computer navigation can produce accurate results even without an intramedullary rod. Image guidance can maintain the accuracy of the standard instrumentation and enhance 3D vision and the intraoperative orientation of the surgeon.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16237558     DOI: 10.1007/s00132-005-0883-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopade        ISSN: 0085-4530            Impact factor:   1.087


  23 in total

1.  Oxford medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. A survival analysis of an independent series.

Authors:  U C Svärd; A J Price
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2001-03

2.  Medial unicompartmental arthroplasty after failed high tibial osteotomy.

Authors:  J L Rees; A J Price; T G Lynskey; U C Svärd; C A Dodd; D W Murray
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2001-09

3.  [Navigation in knee endoprosthesis implantation--preliminary experiences and prospective comparative study with conventional implantation technique].

Authors:  R K Mielke; U Clemens; J H Jens; S Kershally
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  2001 Mar-Apr

4.  Sagittal plane kinematics of a mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at 10 years: a comparative in vivo fluoroscopic analysis.

Authors:  Andrew J Price; Jonathan L Rees; David J Beard; Richie H s Gill; Christopher A f Dodd; David M Murray
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.757

Review 5.  Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee replacement: rationale and correct indications.

Authors:  R M Dominic Meek; Bassam A Masri; Clive P Duncan
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.472

6.  Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery: minimally invasive hip and knee reconstruction.

Authors:  Anthony M DiGioia; Sorin Blendea; Branislav Jaramaz
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.472

7.  Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee replacement with a nonimage-based navigation system.

Authors:  L Perlick; H Bäthis; M Tingart; C Perlick; C Lüring; J Grifka
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2004-03-06       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: outcome in 1,135 cases from the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty study.

Authors:  S Lewold; O Robertsson; K Knutson; L Lidgren
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1998-10

9.  Long-term results after total condylar knee arthroplasty. Significance of radiolucent lines.

Authors:  M L Ecker; P A Lotke; R E Windsor; J P Cella
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Unicompartmental knee replacement: now or never?

Authors:  D W Murray
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 1.390

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  [The foundations of computer assisted surgery].

Authors:  F Langlotz; L-P Nolte; M Tannast
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Correlation of positioning and clinical results in Oxford UKA.

Authors:  Michael Clarius; Christian Hauck; Joern B Seeger; Maria Pritsch; Christian Merle; Peter R Aldinger
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2009-10-09       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Comparison of computer-assisted navigated technology and conventional technology in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Keteng Xu; Qun Chen; Qing Yan; Qin Wang; Jun Sun
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 2.359

4.  Metal backed fixed-bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasties using minimal invasive surgery: a promising outcome analysis of 132 cases.

Authors:  Joel Baur; Lukas Zwicky; Michael Tobias Hirschmann; Thomas Ilchmann; Martin Clauss
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 2.362

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.