Total Knee Revision Supported by the OrthoPilot® Navigation System

  • Ulrich Clemens

Abstract

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has become a success story. Nevertheless, today there are a growing number of arthroplasties that have to be revised. The revision of knee arthroplasty is a challenging procedure. During the last 20 years, there have been significant improvements in the development of implants, instruments, and strategies for revision. Additionally, navigation has assumed a growing role in primary TKA. It has been shown that navigation results in a superior alignment to that of manual implantation (Bäthis et al. 2004; Jenny and Boeri 2001). Achieving perfect alignment is one of the major challenges in revision arthroplasty, and consequently B. Braun Aesculap launched a total knee revision (TKR) version of their navigation system OrthoPilot® in October 2008.

Keywords

Total Knee Arthroplasty Navigation System Femoral Component Tibial Component Mechanical Axis 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bäthis HL, Perlick M, Tingart et al (2004) Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86:682–687PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Fehring TK, Odum S, Olekson C et al (2003) Stem fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty: a comparative analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 416:217–224PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Grafinger RW, Datz L, Hitzl W, Dorn U (2008) CT scans increase rotational accuracy in total knee arthroplasty. Z Orthop Unfall 146:782–787PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hofmann A, Kurtin SM, Lyons S et al (2006) Clinical and radiographic analysis of accurate restoration of the joint line in total knee revision arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 21:1154–1162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hungerford DS (1993) Revision total knee replacement. Tech Orthop 7:80–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jenny JY, Boeri C (2001) Navigated implantation of total knee endoprostheses: a comparative study with conventional instrumentation. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 139:117–119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Laskin RS (2002) Joint line position restoration during revision total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 404:169:–171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Laskin RS (2003) Instrumentation pitfalls: you just can’t go to autopilot! J Arthroplasty 18:18–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Michaut M, Beaufils P, Galaud B et al (2008) Rotational alignment of femoral component with computed assisted surgery (CAS ) during total knee arthroplasty. REV Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 94:580–584PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mountney J, Karamfiles R, Breidahl W et al (2007) The position of the joint line in relation to the tran-epicondylar axis of the knee. J Arthroplasty 22:1201–1207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Partington PF, Sawhney J, Rorabeck CH et al (1999) Joint line restoration after revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 367:165–171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Singerman R, Davy DT, Goldberg VM (1994) Effects of patella alta and patella infera on patellofemoral contact forces. J Biomech 27:1059–1065PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Takai S, Yoshino N, Isshiki T et al (2003) Kneeling view: a new roentgenographic technique to assess rotational deformity and alignment of the distal femur. J Arthroplasty 18:478–483PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ulrich Clemens
    • 1
  1. 1.Spitäler fmi ag, Medical Center FrutigenFrutigen

Personalised recommendations