Arun M Swamy1, Rajesh Malhotra2,3, Vijaykumar Digge1, Vikrant Manhas1, Deepak Gautam1, Deep Narayana Srivastava4. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, 110029, India. 2. Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, 110029, India. rmalhotra62@gmail.com. 3. Department of Orthopaedics, Room No 139, Teaching Block, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Ansari Nagar East, New Delhi, 110029, India. rmalhotra62@gmail.com. 4. Department of Radiodiagnosis, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, 110029, India.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There are limited studies in the literature comparing the alignment accuracy of the large console, imageless, computer-assisted navigation (CAN) and portable, hand-held, accelerometer-based navigation (ABN) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study was aimed to compare the operative time, blood loss, radiological, clinical and functional outcomes between CAN- and ABN-guided bilateral TKA. METHODS: From Jan 2016 to Dec 2017, 50 patients who underwent bilateral TKA were randomized to undergo either CAN-guided or ABN-guided TKA. Tourniquet time and blood loss were recorded, and intra-op complications were noted. Post-op radiological outcomes at 2 weeks were compared between the groups. The clinical and functional outcomes using the American Knee Society Scores (KSS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) were recorded pre-operatively and post-operatively at 3, 6, 12 months and at the end of the study with a minimum follow-up of 48 months. RESULTS: Both groups were well-matched in terms of patient demographic parameters. The mean surgical time per knee was significantly lower in the ABN group (54.5 ± 5.6 min) compared to the CAN group (61.7 ± 13.7 min; p < 0.01). Mean blood loss per knee in the ABN group was 592.1 ± 245.3 mL compared to 682.8 ± 322.0 in the CAN group (p = 0.11). In the ABN group, the mean post-op mechanical axis was 1.2 ± 3.2° (vs 1.5 ± 2.2° in the CAN group, p 0.6), the frontal femoral angle was 88.8 ± 2.3° (vs 88.8 ± 1.8° in the CAN group, p 1.0) and frontal tibial angle was 90.1 ± 1.6° (vs 89.7 ± 1.1° in the CAN group, p 0.14). At 48 month follow-up, the mean functional KSS in the ABN group was 89.0 ± 5.7 (vs 88.1 ± 4.5 in the CAN group, p 0.37) and the mean OKS was 40.5 ± 2.8 (vs 39.6 ± 3.2 in the CAN group, p 0.12). CONCLUSION: Portable, hand-held ABN offers alignment accuracy and functional outcomes in TKA similar to that with CAN, with a reduced duration of surgery. There was no advantage of either of the techniques in terms of clinical or functional outcomes at 48 month follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 1.
PURPOSE: There are limited studies in the literature comparing the alignment accuracy of the large console, imageless, computer-assisted navigation (CAN) and portable, hand-held, accelerometer-based navigation (ABN) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study was aimed to compare the operative time, blood loss, radiological, clinical and functional outcomes between CAN- and ABN-guided bilateral TKA. METHODS: From Jan 2016 to Dec 2017, 50 patients who underwent bilateral TKA were randomized to undergo either CAN-guided or ABN-guided TKA. Tourniquet time and blood loss were recorded, and intra-op complications were noted. Post-op radiological outcomes at 2 weeks were compared between the groups. The clinical and functional outcomes using the American Knee Society Scores (KSS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) were recorded pre-operatively and post-operatively at 3, 6, 12 months and at the end of the study with a minimum follow-up of 48 months. RESULTS: Both groups were well-matched in terms of patient demographic parameters. The mean surgical time per knee was significantly lower in the ABN group (54.5 ± 5.6 min) compared to the CAN group (61.7 ± 13.7 min; p < 0.01). Mean blood loss per knee in the ABN group was 592.1 ± 245.3 mL compared to 682.8 ± 322.0 in the CAN group (p = 0.11). In the ABN group, the mean post-op mechanical axis was 1.2 ± 3.2° (vs 1.5 ± 2.2° in the CAN group, p 0.6), the frontal femoral angle was 88.8 ± 2.3° (vs 88.8 ± 1.8° in the CAN group, p 1.0) and frontal tibial angle was 90.1 ± 1.6° (vs 89.7 ± 1.1° in the CAN group, p 0.14). At 48 month follow-up, the mean functional KSS in the ABN group was 89.0 ± 5.7 (vs 88.1 ± 4.5 in the CAN group, p 0.37) and the mean OKS was 40.5 ± 2.8 (vs 39.6 ± 3.2 in the CAN group, p 0.12). CONCLUSION: Portable, hand-held ABN offers alignment accuracy and functional outcomes in TKA similar to that with CAN, with a reduced duration of surgery. There was no advantage of either of the techniques in terms of clinical or functional outcomes at 48 month follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 1.