Results with eight and a half years average follow-up on two hundred and eight e-Motion FP® knee prostheses, fitted using computer navigation for knee osteoarthritis in patients with over ten degrees genu varum
- 256 Downloads
The aim of this study was to analyse the clinical and radiographic results of 208 e-Motion® posterior cruciate-retaining, mobile bearing prostheses (BBraun-Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany) fitted using computer navigation, for knee osteoarthritis with a genu varum greater than 10°.
One hundred ninety-two patients were operated on with 208 e-Motion® prostheses fitted, between January 2006 and December 2011, using the OrthoPilot® computer navigation system. Average pre-operative IKS score was 70 ± 27 points (6-143) with a function score of 38 ± 20.5 (0-90) and a knee score of 32.5 ± 13 (0-63). Average flexion was 116.5° ± 13° (65-140°). Average pre-operative HKA angle was 166° ± 3° (154-169°).
2Results are available for 134 patients, with a total of 150 knees operated on (38 lost to follow-up and 20 deceased). Average follow-up was 104.5 months (60-116 months). On last follow-up, the average IKS was 180 ± 22 points (95-200) with 86.5 ± 16 points (25-100) for the function score and 93.5 ± 8 points (55-100) for the knee score. Knee flexion was 116° ± 10.5° (80-135°) and average HKA angle was 179° ± 2° (175-184°). The pre-operative objective was achieved in 90.5% of knees.
The e-Motion® mobile bearing posterior cruciate-retaining prosthesis, fitted using computer navigation, offers excellent results after an average of 8.5 years follow-up. These results are at least equivalent, even superior, to those of the posterior-stabilised prostheses usually used for this type of deformity.
KeywordsKnee Osteoarthritis Severe genu varum Total knee arthroplasty Computer-assisted Navigation
There is no funding source.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest related to this article. D. Saragaglia receives royalties from BBraun related to the e-Motion Knee Prosthesis. The other authors had, sometimes, financial support for attending orthopaedic meetings.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Haute Autorité de Santé (2012) Implants articulaires du genou. Révision de catégories homogènes de dispositifs médicaux. http://www.has-sante.fr/portail/jcms/c_1345397/fr/implants-articulaires-de-genou
- 4.Teeny SM, Krackow KA, Hungerford DS, Jones M (1991) Primary total knee arthroplasty in patients with severe varus deformity. A comparative study. Clin Orthop 273:19–31Google Scholar
- 10.Saragaglia D (2009) Computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty: 12 years experience in Grenoble. Emém Acad Nat Chir 8:53–58Google Scholar
- 11.Ewald FC (1989) The knee society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop 248:9–12Google Scholar
- 13.Lee S-Y, Yang J-H, Lee Y-I, Yoon J-R (2016) A novel medial soft tissue release method for Varus deformity during total knee arthroplasty: femoral origin release of the medial collateral ligament. Knee Surg Relat Res 28:153–160. https://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.2016.28.2.153 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 16.Sim JA, Lee YS, Kwak JH, Yang SH, Kim KH, Lee BK (2013) Comparison of complete distal release of the medial collateral ligament and medial epicondylar osteotomy during ligament balancing in varus knee total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg 5:287–291. https://doi.org/10.4055/cios.2013.5.4.287 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 22.Saragaglia D, Picard F (2004) Computer-assisted implantation of total knee endoprosthesis with no preoperative imaging: the kinematic model. In: Navigation and robotics in total joint and spine surgery. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, p 226–233Google Scholar