International Orthopaedics

, 33:1567 | Cite as

Does computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty improve patient outcome at midterm follow-up?

  • Yogeesh D. Kamat
  • Kamran M. Aurakzai
  • Ajeya R. Adhikari
  • Daniel Matthews
  • Yegappan Kalairajah
  • Richard E. Field
Original Paper


Computer navigation assistance in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) results in consistently accurate alignment of prostheses. We aimed to compare the outcome of computer-navigated and conventional TKA and to analyse the radiologically malaligned knees. We analysed 637 primary TKA, carried out by a single surgeon, over five consecutive years and divided them into two cohorts: group 1 = STA (standard instrumentation) and group 2  = CAS (computer-assisted surgery). There was no significant difference between the average Oxford Knee Scores (OKS) of the two groups at any time from one to five years. However, the malaligned TKA at three years had a worse OKS. At medium term there is no difference in clinical outcome measures that can be attributed to the surgeon having used computer-assisted navigation for TKA. But group 1, having a higher proportion of malaligned TKA, might show worsening of OKS at long term.


Total Knee Arthroplasty Mechanical Axis Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Oxford Knee Score Computer Navigation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


La navigation dans la prothèse totale du genou permet d’avoir une amélioration de l’alignement articulaire. Nous avons comparé le devenir d’une prothèse totale du genou naviguée, ou traitée par voie conventionnelle, avec une analyse radiologique des genoux présentant une déviation externe en valgus. Nous avons analysé 637 prothèses totales du genou, réalisées par le même chirurgien sur 5 ans et divisées en deux groupes: le groupe 1 STA avec une instrumentation standard et le groupe 2 CAS avec navigation. Il n’y a pas de différence significative au niveau des scores d’Oxford (OKS) dans les deux groupes sur une période de 1 à 5 ans. Cependant, les genoux présentant un défaut d’axe post-opératoire ont un résultat OKS dégradé au bout de la troisième année. A moyen terme, il n’y a pas de différence sur le devenir clinique mais le groupe 1 a néanmoins une proportion beaucoup plus importante de genoux présentant une déviation axiale ce qui peut influer, de façon négative sur le score OKS à long terme.



Mrs. June Riordan, Outcomes Programme Co-Ordinator, St. Helier Hospital and Mr. Pradeep B. Moonot, Clinical Research Fellow, The South West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre.


  1. 1.
    Bäthis H, Perlick L, Tingart M et al (2004) Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. A comparison of computer-assisted surgery with the conventional technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86(5):682–687CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bejek Z, Sólyom L, Szendrõi M (2007) Experiences with computer navigated total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 31(5):617–622CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bolognesi M, Hofmann A (2005) Computer navigation versus standard instrumentation for TKA: a single-surgeon experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res 440:162–169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chauhan S, Clark G, Lloyd S, Scott R et al (2004) Computer-assisted total knee replacement. A controlled cadaver study using a multi-parameter quantitative CT assessment of alignment (the Perth CT Protocol). J Bone Joint Surg Br 86(6):818–823CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davies AP (2002) Rating systems for total knee replacement. Knee 9(4):261–266CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D et al (1998) Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80(1):63–69CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dunbar MJ, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L (2001) Appropriate questionnaires for knee arthroplasty. Results of a survey of 3600 patients from The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83(3):339–344CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fehring TK, Mason JB, Moskal J, Pollock DC, Mann J, Williams VJ (2006) When computer-assisted knee replacement is the best alternative. Clin Orthop Relat Res 452:132–136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Field RE, Cronin MD, Singh PJ (2005) The Oxford hip scores for primary and revision hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87(5):618–622CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Haaker R, Stockheim M, Kamp M et al (2005) Computer-assisted navigation increases precision of component placement in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 433:152–159CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jeffery RS, Morris RW, Denham RA (1991) Coronal alignment after total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73:709–714PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liow RY, Walker K, Wajid MA et al (2003) Functional rating for knee arthroplasty: comparison of three scoring systems. Orthopedics 26(2):143–149PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maculé-Beneyto F, Hernández-Vaquero D, Segur-Vilalta JM et al (2006) Navigation in total knee arthroplasty. A multicenter study. Int Orthop 30(6):536–540CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Martin A, von Strempel A (2006) Two-year outcomes of computed tomography-based and computed tomography free navigation for total knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 449:275–282PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Matsumoto T, Tsumura N, Kurosaka M et al (2006) Clinical values in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 29:1115–1120PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rand JA, Coventry MB (1988) Ten-year evaluation of geometric total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 232:168–173PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ritter MA, Faris PM, Keating EM, Meding JB (1994) Postoperative alignment of total knee replacement. Its effect on survival. Clin Orthop Relat Res 299:153–156PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Spencer JM, Chauhan SK, Sloan K, Taylor A, Beaver RJ (2007) Computer navigation versus conventional total knee replacement: no difference in functional results at two years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89(4):477–480CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stulberg SD (2003) How accurate is current TKR instrumentation? Clin Orthop Relat Res 416:177–184CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yogeesh D. Kamat
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kamran M. Aurakzai
    • 1
  • Ajeya R. Adhikari
    • 1
  • Daniel Matthews
    • 1
  • Yegappan Kalairajah
    • 1
  • Richard E. Field
    • 1
  1. 1.The South West London Elective Orthopaedic CentreEpsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS TrustEpsomUK
  2. 2.SuttonUK

Personalised recommendations