Skip to main content
Log in

Minimally invasive and computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty versus conventional technique: a prospective, randomized study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We conducted a prospective, randomized study to compare the short-term results of minimally invasive and computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty (MICA-TKA) with those of conventional total knee arthroplasty (C-TKA) for 12-month follow-up. A total of 87 subjects who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study were prospectively randomized consecutively into two groups: the C-TKA group (Group A, n = 44) and the MICA-TKA technique (Group B, n = 43). All the operations were performed by the same senior surgeon. Before surgery and at follow-up, patients were evaluated by the same observer. Tourniquet time as well as total blood loss was compared. Knee Society scores (KSSs), Knee Society functional scores (KSFSs), range of motion (ROM), and radiographic results were assessed and reported preoperatively and at 12-month follow-up. Of these patients, 82 (Group A 42; Group B 40) were available for 12-month evaluation. The two groups were found to be similar in terms of coronal mechanical axis. Similarly, the femoral rotational profile revealed that the prosthesis in Group A was implanted with similar internal rotation to Group B. The average blood loss in patients of Group B was significantly reduced as compared to patients of Group A. No significant difference was detected in terms of tourniquet time. Clinical results in Group B, with regard to ROMs and KSSs, as well as KSFSs were significantly superior to that in Group A. Based on the results obtained from this study, it is demonstrated that MICA-TKA leads to a similarly accurate restoration of leg alignment and component orientation compared to the C-TKA. Moreover, MICA-TKA produces superior clinical results to that of C-TKA. However, there is clearly a need for additional high-quality clinical trials with long-term follow-up to confirm the clinical benefits of MICA-TKA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brown TE, Harper BL, Bjorgul K (2013) Comparison of cemented and uncemented fixation in total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 36(5):380–387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pivec R, Issa K, Kester M, Harwin SF, Mont MA (2013) Long-term outcomes of MUA for stiffness in primary TKA. J Knee Surg (in press)

  3. Fu D, Li G, Chen K, Zeng H, Zhang X, Cai Z (2013) Comparison of clinical outcome between simultaneous-bilateral and staged-bilateral total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of retrospective studies. J Arthroplasty 28(7):1141–1147

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sugano N (2013) Computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery and robotic surgery in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg 5(1):1–9

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gandhi R, Dhotar H, Razak F, Tso P (2010) Predicting the longer term outcomes of total knee arthroplasty. Knee 17(1):15–18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lin WP, Lin J, Horng LC, Chang SM, Jiang CC (2009) Quadriceps-sparing, minimal-incision total knee arthroplasty: a comparative study. J Arthroplasty 24(7):1024–1032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Scuderi GR, Tenholder M, Capeci C (2004) Surgical approaches in mini incision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 428:61–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Karachalios T, Giotikas D, Roidis N (2008) Total knee replacement performed with either a mini-midvastus or a standard approach: a prospective randomized clinical and radiological trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90(5):584–592

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schroer WC, Diesfeld PJ, Reedy ME, LeMarr AR (2008) Minisubvastus approach for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 23(1):19–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tashiro Y, Miura H, Matsuda S (2007) Minimally invasive versus standard approach in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 463:144–150

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kosilek FR, Bonutti PM, Hozack WJ (2007) Clinical experience using a minimally invasive surgical approach for total knee arthroplasty: early results of a prospective randomized study compared to a standard approach. J Arthroplasty 22(1):8–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang ZX, Zhu W, Gu BB, Zhu LX, Chen CM (2013) Mini-midvastus versus mini-medial parapatellar approach in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 133(3):389–395

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nestor BJ, Toulson CE, Backus SI (2010) Mini-midvastus vs. standard medial parapatellar approach: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study in patients undergoing bilateral total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 25(6):5–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bonutti PM, Neal DJ, Kester MA (2003) Minimal incision total knee arthroplasty using the suspended leg technique. Orthopedics 26(9):899–903

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bonutti PM, Mont MA, McMahon M, Ragland PS, Kester M (2004) Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86(2):26–32

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Molli RG, Anderson KC, Buehler KC, Markel DC (2011) Computer-assisted navigation software advancements improve the accuracy of total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 26(3):432–438

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cheng T, Zhao S, Peng X, Zhang X (2012) Does computer-assisted surgery improve postoperative leg alignment and implant positioning following total knee arthroplasty? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(7):1307–1322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Seon JK, Song EK (2005) Functional impact of navigation-assisted minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 28(10):1251–1254

    Google Scholar 

  19. Seon JK, Song EK (2006) Navigation-assisted less invasive total knee arthroplasty compared with conventional total knee arthroplasty: a randomized prospective trial. J Arthroplasty 21(6):777–782

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Confalonieri N, Manzotti A, Pullen C, Ragone V (2007) Mini-incision versus mini-incision and computer-assisted surgery in total knee replacement: a radiological prospective randomised study. Knee 14(6):443–447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hart R, Janecek M, Cizmar I, Stipcak V, Kucera B, Filan P (2006) Minimally invasive and navigated implantation for total knee arthroplasty: X-ray analysis and early clinical results. Orthopade 35(5):552–557

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Seon JK, Song EK, Yoon TR, Park SJ, Bae BH, Cho SG (2007) Comparison of functional results with navigation-assisted minimally invasive and conventional techniques in bilateral total knee arthroplasty. Comput Aided Surg 12(3):189–193

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lüring C, Beckmann J, Haiböck P, Perlick L, Grifka J, Tingart M (2008) Minimal invasive and computer assisted total knee replacement compared with the conventional technique: a prospective, randomised trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16(10):928–934

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lee DH, Choi J, Nha KW, Kim HJ, Han SB (2011) No difference in early functional outcomes for mini-midvastus and limited medial parapatellar approaches in navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(1):66–73

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bonutti PM, Zywiel MG, Ulrich SD, McGrath MS, Mont MA (2010) Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: pitfalls and complications. Am J Orthop 39(10):480–484

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Barrack RL, Barnes CL, Burnett RS, Miller D, Clohisy JC, Maloney WJ (2009) Minimal incision surgery as a risk factor for early failure of total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 24(4):489–498

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Haas SB, Cook S, Beksac B (2004) Minimally invasive total knee replacement through a mini midvastus approach: a comparative study. Clin Orthop 428:68–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tenholder M, Clarke HD, Scuderi GR (2005) Minimal-incision total knee arthroplasty: the early clinical experience. Clin Orthop 440:67–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

No fund was received in support of this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhenxiang Zhang.

Additional information

Zhenxiang Zhang and Beibei Gu are co-first authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zhang, Z., Gu, B., Zhu, W. et al. Minimally invasive and computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty versus conventional technique: a prospective, randomized study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 24, 1475–1479 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-013-1313-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-013-1313-z

Keywords

Navigation