Literature DB >> 17463115

Computer navigation versus conventional total knee replacement: no difference in functional results at two years.

J M Spencer1, S K Chauhan, K Sloan, A Taylor, R J Beaver.   

Abstract

We previously compared the component alignment in total knee replacement using a computer-navigated technique with a conventional jig-based method. We randomly allocated 71 patients to undergo either computer-navigated or conventional replacement. An improved alignment was seen in the computer-navigated group. The patients were then followed up post-operatively for two years, using the Knee Society score, the Short Form-36 health survey, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index, the Bartlett Patellar pain questionnaire and the Oxford knee score, to assess functional outcome. At two years post-operatively 60 patients were available for assessment, 30 in each group and 62 patients completed a postal survey. No patient in either group had undergone revision. All variables were analysed for differences between the groups either by Student's t-test or the Mann-Whitney U test. Differences between the two groups did not reach significance for any of the outcome measures at any time point. At two years postoperatively, the frequency of mild to severe anterior pain was not significantly different (p = 0.818), varying between 44% (14) for the computer-navigated group, and 47% (14) for the conventionally-replaced group. The Bartlett Patellar score and the Oxford knee score were also not significantly different (t-test p = 0.161 and p = 0.607, respectively). The clinical outcome of the patients with a computer-navigated knee replacement appears to be no different to that of a more conventional jig-based technique at two years post-operatively, despite the better alignment achieved with computer-navigated surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17463115     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B4.18094

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br        ISSN: 0301-620X


  55 in total

Review 1.  Computer assisted navigation in knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Dae Kyung Bae; Sang Jun Song
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2011-12-01

2.  The limits of precision in conventionally instrumented computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  R E da Assunção; N J Hancock; W J M Bruce; P Walker
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-03-23       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  No difference in ROM and knee function between mobile and floating platforms in TKA.

Authors:  Johannes Holinka; Navid Bahrami; Richard Lass; Sophie Frantal; Reinhard Windhager; Hugo Axel Wanivenhaus
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-06-29       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Functional outcome after computer-assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Jörg Lützner; Klaus-Peter Günther; Stephan Kirschner
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Imageless computer assisted versus conventional total knee replacement. A Bayesian meta-analysis of 23 comparative studies.

Authors:  Yaron S Brin; Vassilios S Nikolaou; Lawrence Joseph; David J Zukor; John Antoniou
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  A randomized controlled clinical and radiological trial about outcomes of navigation-assisted TKA compared to conventional TKA: long-term follow-up.

Authors:  E K Song; Pranav R Agrawal; S K Kim; H Y Seo; J K Seon
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Computer-Assisted Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery.

Authors:  Timo Stübig; Henning Windhagen; Christian Krettek; Max Ettinger
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2020-11-20       Impact factor: 5.594

8.  Does computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty improve patient outcome at midterm follow-up?

Authors:  Yogeesh D Kamat; Kamran M Aurakzai; Ajeya R Adhikari; Daniel Matthews; Yegappan Kalairajah; Richard E Field
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-11-26       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 9.  Navigation knee replacement.

Authors:  Rupen Dattani; Surendra Patnaik; Avadhoot Kantak; Georgis Tselentakis
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-10-29       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Comparative study of the use of computer assisted navigation system for axial correction in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Mui-Hong Lim; Andras Tallay; John Bartlett
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.