Seung Joon Rhee1, Hyun-Jung Kim2, Chang-Rack Lee3, Chang-Wan Kim3, Heui-Chul Gwak3, Jung-Han Kim3. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Preventive Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is not clear whether long-term outcomes differ between computer-navigated and conventional total knee arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing the radiographic outcomes, the long-term functional outcomes, and survivorship between computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty and conventional total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify studies comparing long-term outcomes between computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty and conventional total knee arthroplasty. Randomized controlled trials with mean follow-up durations of >8 years were included. The meta-analysis compared radiographic outcomes (postoperative alignment), functional outcomes (range of motion and patient-reported outcomes), and survivorship of the 2 techniques. RESULTS: Nine studies were included. A meta-analysis of accuracy revealed better outcomes in computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty when compared with conventional total knee arthroplasty in terms of the sagittal alignment of the femoral component (risk ratio [RR], 0.69; [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.51 to 0.93]; p = 0.02) and the coronal alignment of the tibial component (RR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.95]; p = 0.02). The mechanical axis of the lower extremity, the coronal alignment of the femoral component, and the sagittal alignment of the tibial component did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. The functional outcomes did not differ significantly between the 2 techniques. Both in terms of the revision rate and the incidence of aseptic loosening, there were no differences between the 2 techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Although computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty resulted in better outcomes in postoperative component alignment than conventional total knee arthroplasty, there were no significant differences in long-term functional outcomes and survivorship between the 2 techniques. To fully evaluate the utility of computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty, additional randomized controlled studies including diverse ethnic groups and countries, as well as studies evaluating the correlation between postoperative alignment and long-term survivorship, are necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
BACKGROUND: It is not clear whether long-term outcomes differ between computer-navigated and conventional total knee arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing the radiographic outcomes, the long-term functional outcomes, and survivorship between computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty and conventional total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify studies comparing long-term outcomes between computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty and conventional total knee arthroplasty. Randomized controlled trials with mean follow-up durations of >8 years were included. The meta-analysis compared radiographic outcomes (postoperative alignment), functional outcomes (range of motion and patient-reported outcomes), and survivorship of the 2 techniques. RESULTS: Nine studies were included. A meta-analysis of accuracy revealed better outcomes in computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty when compared with conventional total knee arthroplasty in terms of the sagittal alignment of the femoral component (risk ratio [RR], 0.69; [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.51 to 0.93]; p = 0.02) and the coronal alignment of the tibial component (RR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.95]; p = 0.02). The mechanical axis of the lower extremity, the coronal alignment of the femoral component, and the sagittal alignment of the tibial component did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. The functional outcomes did not differ significantly between the 2 techniques. Both in terms of the revision rate and the incidence of aseptic loosening, there were no differences between the 2 techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Although computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty resulted in better outcomes in postoperative component alignment than conventional total knee arthroplasty, there were no significant differences in long-term functional outcomes and survivorship between the 2 techniques. To fully evaluate the utility of computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty, additional randomized controlled studies including diverse ethnic groups and countries, as well as studies evaluating the correlation between postoperative alignment and long-term survivorship, are necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Authors: Ryan J O'Rourke; Anthony J Milto; Brian P Kurcz; Steven L Scaife; D Gordon Allan; Youssef El Bitar Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Kai Lei; Li Ming Liu; Yi Xiang; Xin Chen; Hua Quan Fan; Yang Peng; Jiang Ming Luo; Lin Guo Journal: J Orthop Surg Res Date: 2020-12-09 Impact factor: 2.359