Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A randomized controlled clinical and radiological trial about outcomes of navigation-assisted TKA compared to conventional TKA: long-term follow-up

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

Well balanced knees with good alignment are essential for a well-functioning TKA with long survival of its implants. This prospective randomized study comparing navigation-assisted TKA and conventional TKA reported the clinical and radiological outcomes at a follow-up of 9 years. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes for patients who underwent navigation-assisted TKA or conventional TKA after long-term follow-up.

Methods

A total of 80 patients (88 knees) were available for physical and radiological examination 9 years after TKA. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using HSS, WOMAC, and KS function and pain scores. And radiological outcomes of the component loosening and its survivorship during 9-year follow-up were also evaluated.

Results

There were no significant differences in the field of clinical outcomes between the two groups. In terms of radiological outcomes, the navigation group had fewer alignment outliers (7.3 vs 20 %, p = 0.006). Although the clinical outcomes showed no differences between the two groups, the survival rate was slightly better in the navigation group than in the conventional group without statistical significance (best-case scenario 100 vs 95.3 %, n.s., worst-case scenario 95.6 vs 88.4 %, n.s.).

Conclusion

Navigation-assisted TKA produced better alignment outcomes and better survival rates than conventional instruments although some of the differences were not statistically significant.

Level of evidence

I.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Babazadeh S, Dowsey MM, Bingham RJ, Ek ET, Stoney JD, Choong PF (2013) The long leg radiograph is a reliable method of assessing alignment when compared to computer-assisted navigation and computer tomography. Knee 20(4):242–249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bauwens K, Matthes G, Wich M, Gebhard F, Hanson B, Ekkernkamp A, Stengel D (2007) Navigated total knee replacement. A meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(2):261–269

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Boonen B, Schotanus MG, Kernes B, Van der Weegen W, Van Drumpt RA, Kort NP (2013) Intra-operative results and radiological outcome of conventional and patient-specific surgery in total knee arthroplasty: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(10):2206–2212

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Chauhan SK, Scott RG, Breidahl W, Beaver RJ (2004) Computer assisted knee arthroplasty versus a conventional jig based technique: a randomised prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surgery Br 86(3):372–377

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Choong PF, Dowsey MM, Stoney JD (2009) Does accurate anatomical alignment result in better function and quality of life? Comparing conventional and computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 24(4):560–569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cip J, Widemschek M, Lueqmair M, Sheinkop MB, Benesch T, Martin A (2014) Conventional versus computer-assisted technique for total knee arthroplasty: a minimum of 5-year follow-up of 200 patients in a prospective randomized comparative trial. J Arthroplasty 29(9):1795–1802

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Clemens U, Miehlke RK (2005) Advanced navigation planning including soft tissue management. Orthopaedics 28(10 suppl):s1259–s1262

    Google Scholar 

  8. Eckhoff DG, Piatt BE, Gnadinger CA, Blaschke RC (1995) Assessing rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 318:176–181

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ewald FC (1989) The knee society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:9–12

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fehring TK, Odum S, Griffin WL, Mason JB, Nadaud M (2001) Early failures in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 392:315–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Han SB, Nha KW, Yoon JR, Lee DH, Chae IJ (2008) The reliability of navigation-guided gap technique in total knee arthroplasty. Orthopaedics 31(10 suppl 1):300–302

  12. Harvie P, Sloan K, Beaver RJ (2012) Computer navigation vs conventional total knee arthroplasty five-year functional results of a prospective randomized trial. J Arthroplasty 27(5):667–672

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Huang TW, Peng KT, Huang KC, Lee MS, Hsu RW (2014) Differences in component and limb alignment between computer-assisted and conventional surgery total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(12):2954–2961

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ishida K, Matsumoto T, Tsumura N, Kubo S, Kitagawa A, Chin T, Iquchi T, Kurosaka M, Kuroda R (2011) Mid-term outcomes of computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(7):1107–1112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jeffery RS, Morris RW, Denham RA (1991) Coronal alignment after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73(5):709–714

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kim YH, Park JW, Kim JS (2012) Computer-navigated versus conventional total knee arthroplasty a prospective randomized trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(22):2017–2024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lin SY, Chen CH, Fu YC et al (2013) Comparison of the clinical and radiological outcomes of three minimally invasive techniques for total knee replacement at two years. Bone Joint J 95B(7):906–910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Longstaff LM, Sloan K, Stamp K, Scaddan M, Beaver R (2009) Good alignment after total knee arthroplasty leads to faster rehabilitation and better function. J Arthroplasty 24(4):570–578

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lutzner J, Dexel J, Kirschner S (2013) No difference between computer-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty: five-year results of a prospective randomised study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(10):2241–2247

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Marques CJ, Daniel S, Sufi-Siavach A, Lampe F (2015) No differences in clinical outcomes between fixed- and mobile-bearing computer-assisted total knee arthroplasties and no correlations between navigation data and clinical scores. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(6):1660–1668

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mason JB, Fehring TK, Estok R, Banel D, Fahrbach K (2007) Meta-analysis of alignment outcomes in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty 22(8):1097–1106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Miller MC, Berger RA, Petrella AJ, Karmas A, Rubash HE (2001) Optimizing femoral component rotation in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 392:38–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Molfetta L, Caldo D (2008) Computer navigation versus conventional implantation for varus knee total arthroplasty: a case–control study at 5 years follow-up. Knee 15(2):75–79

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ritter MA, Faris PM, Keating EM, Meding JB (1994) Postoperative alignment of total knee replacement. Its effect on survival. Clin Orthop Relat Res 299:153–156

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 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 

  27. Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Shastri S, Jacoby SM (2002) Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res 404:7–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Sikorski JM (2008) Alignment in total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90(9):1121–1127

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Spencer JM, Chauhan SK, Sloan K, Taylor A, Beaver RJ (2007) Computer navigation versus conventional total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89(4):477–480

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Victor J, Hoste D (2004) Image-based computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty leads to lower variability in coronal alignment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 428:131–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wasiliewski RC, Galante JO, Leighty RM, Natarajan RN, Rosenberg AG (1994) Wear patterns on retrieval polyethylene inserts and their relationship to technical considerations during total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 299:31–43

    Google Scholar 

  32. Zhang GQ, Chen JY, Chai W, Liu M, Wang Y (2011) Comparison between computer-assisted-navigation and conventional total knee arthroplasties in patients undergoing simultaneous bilateral procedures: a randomized clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93(13):1190–1196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by a grant of the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2014R1A1A2059147).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Center for Joint Disease, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, 160Ilsimri, Hwasun-eup, Hwasun-gun, Jeollanamdo, 519-809, South Korea

    E. K. Song, Pranav R. Agrawal & J. K. Seon

  2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Chonnam National University Hospital, Gwangju, South Korea

    S. K. Kim & H. Y. Seo

Authors
  1. E. K. Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pranav R. Agrawal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. K. Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. H. Y. Seo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. K. Seon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. K. Seon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Song, E.K., Agrawal, P.R., Kim, S.K. et al. A randomized controlled clinical and radiological trial about outcomes of navigation-assisted TKA compared to conventional TKA: long-term follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24, 3381–3386 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-3996-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-3996-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation