Literature DB >> 18974969

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

Mui-Hong Lim1, Andras Tallay, John Bartlett.   

Abstract

The aim of our study was to compare the use of the Orthopilot Navigation system with conventional non-navigation technique for medial UKA with respect to the intraoperative mechanical limb alignment measurements and correlation with the postoperative radiological measurements. The postoperative mechanical limb alignment axes of 51 consecutive medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty performed by a single surgeon over a 12-month period were measured. The cases were randomly assigned to two groups of which 21 cases were performed using conventional non-navigation based technique and 30 cases were performed using the Orthopilot Navigation System. Computed tomography (CT) scanogram was performed for all cases within the same hospitalization stay to assess the postoperative mechanical limb alignment. Our results showed that the non-navigated group had a more neutral mechanical axis with a narrower range compared to the navigation assisted group. The difference in the mean mechanical axis between the two groups was statistically not significant. There was poor correlation between the intraoperative navigation system measurements and the postoperative radiological measurements. In conclusion, the use of computer navigation in UKA is not as well validated as compared to TKA. We did not demonstrate any improvement in postoperative axial limb alignment measurement in using a computer navigation system compared to conventional non-navigation technique.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18974969     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-008-0655-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  22 in total

1.  Unicompartmental knee prosthesis implantation with a non-image-based navigation system: rationale, technique, case-control comparative study with a conventional instrumented implantation.

Authors:  Jean-Yves Jenny; Cyril Boeri
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2002-12-18       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  The use of computer-assisted surgical navigation to prevent malalignment in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Andrew J Cossey; Anthony J Spriggins
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  Computer assisted navigation in total knee arthroplasty: comparison with conventional methods.

Authors:  Kevin C Anderson; Knute C Buehler; David C Markel
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  Making your next unicompartmental knee arthroplasty last: three keys to success.

Authors:  Leo A Whiteside
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 4.757

5.  Alignments and clinical results in conventional and navigated total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  A Ensini; F Catani; A Leardini; M Romagnoli; S Giannini
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Navigation in total knee arthroplasty. A multicenter study.

Authors:  F Maculé-Beneyto; D Hernández-Vaquero; J M Segur-Vilalta; R Colomina-Rodríguez; P Hinarejos-Gomez; I García-Forcada; B Seral Garcia
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-05-31       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Failure mechanisms after unicompartmental and tricompartmental primary knee replacement with cement.

Authors:  O Furnes; B Espehaug; S A Lie; S E Vollset; L B Engesaeter; L I Havelin
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty versus the conventional technique: how precise is navigation in clinical routine?

Authors:  Markus Tingart; Christian Lüring; Holger Bäthis; Johannes Beckmann; Joachim Grifka; Lars Perlick
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2007-09-26       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Navigated total knee replacement. A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kai Bauwens; Gerrit Matthes; Michael Wich; Florian Gebhard; Beate Hanson; Axel Ekkernkamp; Dirk Stengel
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  Unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee. Postoperative alignment and its influence on overall results.

Authors:  W R Kennedy; R P White
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  13 in total

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

Authors:  Jean-Yves Jenny
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Does computer-assisted surgery improve postoperative leg alignment and implant positioning following total knee arthroplasty? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials?

Authors:  Tao Cheng; Song Zhao; Xiaochun Peng; Xianlong Zhang
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Accuracy of Individualized Custom Tibial Cutting Guides in UKA.

Authors:  Thomas J Heyse; Joseph D Lipman; Carl W Imhauser; Scott M Tucker; Yogesh Rajak; Geoffrey H Westrich
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2014-09-09

4.  Navigation of the tibial plateau alone appears to be sufficient in computer-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Dominique Saragaglia; Frédéric Picard; Ramsay Refaie
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2012-10-16       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Improved accuracy in computer-assisted unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Patrick Weber; Alexander Crispin; Florian Schmidutz; Sandra Utzschneider; Matthias F Pietschmann; Volkmar Jansson; Peter E Müller
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-01-23       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Is tibial cut navigation alone sufficient in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty? Continuous series of fifty nine procedures.

Authors:  Thomas Gicquel; Jean Christophe Lambotte; Jean Louis Polard; Mickael Ropars; Denis Huten
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-06-30       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Computerised navigation of unicondylar knee prostheses: from primary implantation to revision to total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Dominique Saragaglia; Benoit Marques Da Silva; Pierrick Dijoux; Jérémy Cognault; Julia Gaillot; Régis Pailhé
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-09-28       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Superior alignment but no difference in clinical outcome after minimally invasive computer-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (MICA-UKA).

Authors:  Zhenxiang Zhang; Wei Zhu; Lixian Zhu; Yaqing Du
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-11-26       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Computer-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty using dedicated software versus a conventional technique.

Authors:  Alfonso Manzotti; Pietro Cerveri; Chris Pullen; Norberto Confalonieri
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Kinematic alignment of medial UKA is safe: a systematic review.

Authors:  Charles Rivière; Sivan Sivaloganathan; Loic Villet; Philippe Cartier; Sébastien Lustig; Pascal-André Vendittoli; Justin Cobb
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-03-20       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.