Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Less outliers in pinless navigation compared with conventional surgery in total knee arthroplasty

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

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of a new pinless navigation system (BrainLAB® VectorVision® Knee 2.5 Navigation System) as an intra-operative alignment check in total knee arthroplasty using conventional cutting jigs.

Methods

200 patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty using conventional technique or pinless navigation by a senior surgeon were included in the study and prospectively followed up. Intra-operative readings from the pinless navigation system were recorded, and post-operative long limb radiographic films were taken. The accepted values for normal alignment were 180 ± 3° for Hip-Knee-Ankle Angle and 90 ± 3° for Coronal Femoral-Component Angle or Coronal Tibia-Component Angle.

Results

There was no difference in the duration of surgery. The mean Coronal Femoral-Component Angle was 89.8 ± 2.0° and 91.3 ± 2.3° in the pinless navigation and conventional group, respectively (p < 0.001). For Hip-Knee-Ankle Angle, the proportion of outliers was 10 % in the pinless navigation group compared to 26 % in the conventional group (p = 0.005). For Coronal Femoral-Component Angle and Coronal Tibia-Component Angle, the proportion of outliers was 7 and 4 %, respectively, in the pinless navigation group, compared to 22 and 19 % in the conventional group (p = 0.004 and p = 0.001, respectively). The measurements of Coronal Femoral-Component Angle and Coronal Tibia-Component Angle on post-operative radiographic films were similar to intra-operative readings.

Conclusions

This study showed that pinless navigation is an effective tool for reducing the proportion of outliers, without significantly increasing the duration of surgery. The authors recommend its use in total knee arthroplasty using conventional cutting jigs.

Level of evidence

III.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Beldame J, Boisrenoult P, Beaufils P (2010) Pin track induced fractures around computer-assisted TKA. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 96(3):249–255

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berning ET, Fowler RM (2011) Thermal damage and tracker-pin track infection in computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 26(6):977.e21–977.e214

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bonutti P, Dethmers D, Stiehl JB (2008) Case report: femoral shaft fracture resulting from femoral tracker placement in navigated TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:1499–1502

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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(3):331–339

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chandrasekaran S, Molnar RB (2008) Minimally invasive imageless computer-navigated knee surgery: initial results. J Arthroplast 23(3):441–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cheng T, Zhang G, Zhang X (2011) Imageless navigation system does not improve component rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty. J Surg Res 171(2):590–600

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 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 

  9. Chin PL, Foo LS, Yang KY, Yeo SJ, Lo NN (2007) Randomized controlled trial comparing the radiologic outcomes of conventional and minimally invasive techniques for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 22(6):800–806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chin PL, Yang KY, Yeo SJ, Lo NN (2005) Randomized control trial comparing radiographic total knee arthroplasty implant placement using computer navigation versus conventional technique. J Arthroplast 20(5):618–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Desai AS, Dramis A, Kendoff D, Board TN (2011) Critical review of the current practice for computer-assisted navigation in total knee replacement surgery: cost-effectiveness and clinical outcome. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 4(1):11–15

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Figgie HE III, Goldberg VM, Figgie MP, Inglis AE, Kelly M, Sobel M (1989) The effect of alignment of the implant on fractures of the patella after condylar total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 71(7):1031–1039

    Google Scholar 

  13. Harvie P, Sloan K, Beaver RJ (2012) Computer navigation vs conventional total knee arthroplasty: five-year functional results of a prospective randomized trial. J Arthroplast 27(5):667–672.e1

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hetaimish BM, Khan MM, Simunovic N, Al-Harbi HH, Bhandari M, Zalzal PK (2012) Meta-analysis of navigation vs conventional total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 27(6):1177–1182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hoke D, Jafari SM, Orozco F, Ong A (2011) Tibial shaft stress fractures resulting from placement of navigation tracker pins. J Arthroplast 26(3):504.e5–504.e8

    Google Scholar 

  16. Huang NF, Dowsey MM, Ee E, Stoney JD, Babazadeh S, Choong PF (2012) Coronal alignment correlates with outcome after total knee arthroplasty: five-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplast 27(9):1737–1741

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Jung HJ, Jung YB, Song KS, Park SJ, Lee JS (2007) Fractures associated with computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty. A report of two cases. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89(10):2280–2284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jung KA, Lee SC, Ahn NK, Song MB, Nam CH, Shon OJ (2011) Delayed femoral fracture through a tracker pin site after navigated total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 26(3):505.e9–505.e11

    Google Scholar 

  20. Li CH, Chen TH, Su YP, Shao PC, Lee KS, Chen WM (2008) Periprosthetic femoral supracondylar fracture after total knee arthroplasty with navigation system. J Arthroplast 23(2):304–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mader JT, Shirtliff M, Calhoun JH (1997) Staging and staging application in osteomyelitis. Clin Infect Dis 25(6):1303–1309

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Marx RG, Grimm P, Lillemoe KA, Robertson CM, Ayeni OR, Lyman S, Bogner EA, Pavlov H (2011) Reliability of lower extremity alignment measurement using radiographs and PACS. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(10):1693–1698

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ossendorf C, Fuchs B, Koch P (2006) Femoral stress fracture after computer navigated total knee arthroplasty. Knee 13(5):397–399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Owens RF Jr, Swank ML (2010) Low incidence of postoperative complications due to pin placement in computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 25(7):1096–1098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sparmann M, Wolke B, Czupalla H, Banzer D, Zink A (2003) Positioning of total knee arthroplasty with and without navigation support. A prospective, randomised study. J Bone Jt Surg Br 85(6):830–835

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Tingart M, Lüring C, Bäthis H, Beckmann J, Grifka J, Perlick L (2008) Computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty versus the conventional technique: how precise is navigation in clinical routine? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 16(1):44–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wysocki RW, Sheinkop MB, Virkus WW, Della Valle CJ (2008) Femoral fracture through a previous pin site after computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 23(3):462–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors did not receive any outside funding or grants in support of their research for or preparation of this work. Neither they nor a member of their immediate families received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. The authors thank Andy Khye Soon Yew and Stephanie Fook-Chong for their technical support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jerry Yongqiang Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chen, J.Y., Chin, P.L., Tay, D.K.J. et al. Less outliers in pinless navigation compared with conventional surgery in total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22, 1827–1832 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2456-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2456-5

Keywords

Navigation