A Jawhar1, V Shah, S Sohoni, H P Scharf. 1. Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Center, University Medical Center Mannheim of University Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany, Ahmed.Jawhar@umm.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Navigation has been introduced to achieve more accurate positioning of the implants after TKA. The scientific attention was mainly paid on limb alignment rather than restoration of the natural joint line. The aim of our study was to compare the accuracy of the joint line restoration in primary TKA with and without navigation. We hypothesized that joint line reconstruction in navigated TKA is more accurate. METHODS: A total of 493 primary TKAs operated in a single medical centre were consecutively selected and divided into two groups. 206 cases were performed computer assisted (BrainLab CI-System), whereas 287 knees were implanted conventionally. For both groups, the joint line position of the knee was determined on standardized calibrated standing pre- and postoperative digital radiographs in ap view by a modified method of Kawamura et al. A joint line shift of more than 8 mm was defined as outlier. RESULTS: In the conventional group, the joint line shift averaged 0.7 mm (±4.4 mm), whereas the findings in the computer-assisted cases were in average 0.6 mm (±4.5 mm). The joint line was located above 8 mm in 6 % of non-navigated versus 6.8 % of navigated primary TKAs. There were no statistically significant differences of joint line shift between the different component types. A statistically significant relation was not found between joint line shift and leg alignment changes. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional surgical technique allows a precise joint line reconstruction in primary TKA. Navigation did not improve the joint line reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic study, Level III.
PURPOSE: Navigation has been introduced to achieve more accurate positioning of the implants after TKA. The scientific attention was mainly paid on limb alignment rather than restoration of the natural joint line. The aim of our study was to compare the accuracy of the joint line restoration in primary TKA with and without navigation. We hypothesized that joint line reconstruction in navigated TKA is more accurate. METHODS: A total of 493 primary TKAs operated in a single medical centre were consecutively selected and divided into two groups. 206 cases were performed computer assisted (BrainLab CI-System), whereas 287 knees were implanted conventionally. For both groups, the joint line position of the knee was determined on standardized calibrated standing pre- and postoperative digital radiographs in ap view by a modified method of Kawamura et al. A joint line shift of more than 8 mm was defined as outlier. RESULTS: In the conventional group, the joint line shift averaged 0.7 mm (±4.4 mm), whereas the findings in the computer-assisted cases were in average 0.6 mm (±4.5 mm). The joint line was located above 8 mm in 6 % of non-navigated versus 6.8 % of navigated primary TKAs. There were no statistically significant differences of joint line shift between the different component types. A statistically significant relation was not found between joint line shift and leg alignment changes. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional surgical technique allows a precise joint line reconstruction in primary TKA. Navigation did not improve the joint line reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic study, Level III.
Authors: Björn G Ochs; Anna J Schreiner; Peter M de Zwart; Ulrich Stöckle; Christoph Emanuel Gonser Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-09-20 Impact factor: 4.342