Literature DB >> 32944412

Computerized Navigation: A Useful Tool in Total Knee Replacement.

Oystein Gothesen1,2, Oystein Skaden1, Gro S Dyrhovden2,3, Gunnar Petursson4,5, Ove N Furnes2,3.   

Abstract

The purpose of computer assistance in a total knee replacement is to achieve optimal alignment, size, and positioning of the implant. The method is safe and accurate and may be particularly useful in cases with abnormal anatomy. DESCRIPTION: The classical computer-assisted system for total knee replacement was developed with real-time surgical navigation using infrared optical tracking arrays. The tracking arrays are attached to the tibial and femoral shafts, as well as to surgical tools, allowing the surgeon to move the tools relative to the knee. The computer-assisted systems allow the surgeon to combine the "measured resection" and "gap balancing" techniques.Step 1: Preoperative planning. Set up the computer and software with the manufacturer implant features and personal preferences.Step 2: Positioning and surgical exposure. Position the patient in order to optimize the camera view.Step 3: Fixation of marker pins. Fix the marker pins to the tibial and femoral shafts.Step 4: Registration of anatomical landmarks and mechanical axes. Move the limb and mark out the anatomical landmarks according to the instructions given by the computer.Step 5: Adaption to the best model. Continue to register the joint surface and anatomy to adapt the fittest pre-registered model to the knee.Step 6: Fine-tuning. The femoral and tibial components are adjusted in size, flexion, extension, rotation, slope, and positioning along the anterior-posterior axis.Step 7: Navigation of cutting blocks and ligament balancing. The cutting blocks are positioned with the assistance of computerized navigation, adjusting for the mechanical axis and ligament tension. The cuts are then performed. Implant trials are inserted, and remaining soft-tissue releases may be performed assisted by the computer. Final implantation is performed. ALTERNATIVES: Conventional knee replacement using intramedullary rods as guidance. RATIONALE: The alignment and positioning of the implant are improved with the use of computer navigation1-5. Abnormal anatomy, anatomical variants and deformities, and presence of previous fractures are easy to manage with the precise assistance from the computer. Thus, in many cases, computer assistance may be a useful tool. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: Computer-assisted navigation may optimize the precision and accuracy of the surgical procedure. Given the correct target, the outcome of total knee replacement may be more predictable with use of this tool; however, the impact on functional outcomes has not yet been proven to be clinically relevant in clinical trials, and the implant longevity has not been improved6-11. IMPORTANT TIPS: Use two 3-mm drill pins for fixation of the optical array to the tibia and femur.If pins are placed within the wound (not through separate stab incisions), plan the positioning relative to the implant to avoid obstruction of the trials.In severely osteoporotic patients, use bicortical fixation and handle the tissues and limb gently to avoid bumping or displacing the optical array as this will negatively alter the registration and reduce navigational accuracy.Make sure the reflective beads on the optical array are clean at all times and remove them (if using clip-on beads) when using the saw to avoid blood splatter.Train an assistant to press the screen buttons in the correct order and in accordance with the surgical progress.
Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by The Journal of Bone and Joint surgery, Incorporated. All Rights Reserved.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32944412      PMCID: PMC7478328          DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JBJS Essent Surg Tech        ISSN: 2160-2204


  11 in total

1.  Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty versus a conventional jig-based technique. A randomised, prospective trial.

Authors:  S K Chauhan; R G Scott; W Breidahl; R J Beaver
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2004-04

2.  Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. A comparison of computer-assisted surgery with the conventional technique.

Authors:  H Bäthis; L Perlick; M Tingart; C Lüring; D Zurakowski; J Grifka
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2004-07

3.  Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on the fifteen-year survival of modern, cemented total knee replacements.

Authors:  Sebastien Parratte; Mark W Pagnano; Robert T Trousdale; Daniel J Berry
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2010-09-15       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  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

Review 5.  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

6.  Computer-Assisted Compared with Conventional Total Knee Replacement: A Multicenter Parallel-Group Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Gunnar Petursson; Anne Marie Fenstad; Øystein Gøthesen; Gro Sævik Dyrhovden; Geir Hallan; Stephan M Röhrl; Arild Aamodt; Ove Furnes
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Neutral mechanical alignment: a requirement for successful TKA: opposes.

Authors:  Johan Bellemans
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2011-09-09       Impact factor: 1.390

8.  Good alignment after total knee arthroplasty leads to faster rehabilitation and better function.

Authors:  Lee M Longstaff; Karen Sloan; Nikki Stamp; Matt Scaddan; Richard Beaver
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2008-05-19       Impact factor: 4.757

9.  Does accurate anatomical alignment result in better function and quality of life? Comparing conventional and computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Peter F Choong; Michelle M Dowsey; James D Stoney
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2008-05-19       Impact factor: 4.757

10.  Similar migration in computer-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Gunnar Petursson; Anne Marie Fenstad; Øystein Gøthesen; Kristin Haugan; Gro Sævik Dyrhovden; Geir Hallan; Stephan M Röhrl; Arild Aamodt; Kjell G Nilsson; Ove Furnes
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 3.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.