Advertisement

International Orthopaedics

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 27–30 | Cite as

Cutting and implanting errors in minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty using a navigation system

  • Masahiro HasegawaEmail author
  • Kakunoshin Yoshida
  • Hiroki Wakabayashi
  • Akihiro Sudo
Original Paper

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of bone cutting and implantation in minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty with image-free navigation.

Methods

The alignment of the tibial and femoral bone resection was measured in 40 knees during surgery. The alignment measurement was repeated after cementing the tibial and femoral components. We evaluated the cutting error and the implanting error.

Results

The mean tibial cutting errors were 0.5 and 0.7° in the frontal and sagittal planes, respectively. The mean femoral cutting errors were 0.5 and 0.9° in the frontal and sagittal planes, respectively. The mean tibial implanting errors were 1.0 and 0.9° in the frontal and sagittal planes, respectively. The mean femoral implanting error was 0.7° in the frontal plane.

Conclusions

Computer-assisted navigation was useful in checking the alignment of both bone cut and cementation.

Keywords

Total Knee Arthroplasty Femoral Component Tibial Component Posterior Slope Component Alignment 
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.

Notes

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Bäthis H, Perlick L, Tingart M, Lüring C, Zurakowski D, Grifka J (2004) Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. A comparison of computer-assisted surgery with the conventional technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86-B:682–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brin YS, Nikolaou VS, Joseph L, Zukor DJ, Antoniou J (2011) Imageless computer assisted versus conventional total knee replacement. A Bayesian meta-analysis of 23 comparative studies. Int Orthop 35:331–339PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kamat YD, Aurakzai KM, Adhikari AR, Matthews D, Kalairajah Y, Field RE (2009) Does computer navigation in total knee arthroplasty improve patient outcome at midterm follow-up? Int Orthop 33:1567–1570PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cinotti G, Ripani FR, Sessa P, Giannicola G (2012) Combining different rotational alignment axes with navigation may reduce the need for lateral retinacular release in total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 36:1595–1600PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Biasca N, Wirth S, Bungartz M (2009) Mechanical accuracy of navigated minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty (MIS TKA). Knee 16:22–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hasegawa M, Yoshida K, Wakabayashi H, Sudo A (2011) Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty: comparison of jig-based technique versus computer navigation for clinical and alignment outcome. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:904–910PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dalury DF, Dennis DA (2005) Mini-incision total knee arthroplasty can increase risk of component malalignment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 440:77–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Otani T, Whiteside LA, White SE (1993) Cutting errors in preparation of femoral components in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 8:503–510PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Catani F, Biasca N, Ensini A, Leardini A, Bianchi L, Digennaro V, Giannini S (2008) Alignment deviation between bone resection and final implant positioning in computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90:765–771PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nakahara H, Matsuda S, Moro-oka TA, Okazaki K, Tashiro Y, Iwamoto Y (2012) Cutting error of the distal femur in total knee arthroplasty by use of a navigation system. J Arthroplasty 27:1119–1122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van der Linden-van der Zwaag HM, Bos J, van der Heide HJ, Nelissen RG (2011) A computed tomography based study on rotational alignment accuracy of the femoral component in total knee arthroplasty using computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery. Int Orthop 35:845–850PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim TK, Chang CB, Kang YG, Chung BJ, Cho HJ, Seong SC (2010) Execution accuracy of bone resection and implant fixation in computer assisted minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty. Knee 17:23–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Matsumoto T, Muratsu H, Kubo S, Matsushita T, Ishida K, Sasaki H, Oka S, Kurosaka M, Kuroda R (2012) Soft tissue balance using the tibia first gap technique with navigation system in cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 36:975–980PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yau WP, Chiu KY (2008) Cutting errors in total knee replacement: assessment by computer assisted surgery. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16:670–673PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yaffe MA, Koo SS, Stulberg SD (2008) Radiographic and navigation measurements of TKA limb alignment do not correlate. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:2736–2744PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Choi WC, Lee S, An JH, Kim D, Seong SC, Lee MC (2011) Plain radiograph fails to reflect the alignment and advantages of navigation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 26:756–764PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Plaskos C, Hodgson AJ, Inkpen K, McGraw RW (2002) Bone cutting errors in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 17:698–705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    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-A:261–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masahiro Hasegawa
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kakunoshin Yoshida
    • 1
  • Hiroki Wakabayashi
    • 1
  • Akihiro Sudo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryMie University Graduate School of MedicineTsu CityJapan

Personalised recommendations