Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does computer-assisted surgery improve postoperative leg alignment and implant positioning following total knee arthroplasty? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials?

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

Abstract

Purpose

Computer-assisted surgery has been proposed as a technique to improve implant alignment during total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, there is still a debate over the accuracy of placing the femoral and tibial components using computer-assisted systems in TKA. The aim of this study is to establish whether computer-assisted surgery leads to superior mechanical leg axis and implant positioning than conventional technique in patients with primary TKA.

Methods

Major electronic databases were systematically searched to identify relevant studies without language restriction. A meta-analysis of 41 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs was performed in a random effects model. A subgroup analysis was conducted by type of navigation system to explore the clinical heterogeneity between these trials. The following radiographic parameters were used to compare computer-assisted surgery with conventional technique: (1) mechanical leg axis, (2) femoral component coronal alignment, (3) tibial component coronal alignment, (4) femoral component sagittal alignment, and (5) tibial component sagittal alignment.

Results

For the mechanical leg axis and coronal positioning of femoral and tibial components, there are statistically significant reductions in the number of patients with malalignment in the CAS group if the outlier cutoff value is ±3 or 2° in the coronal and sagittal planes, respectively. Subgroup analysis demonstrates that CT-free navigation systems provide better alignment than conventional techniques in the coronal and sagittal alignment of femoral components within ±3 and 2°. If the outlier cutoff value for the tibial sagittal alignment is ±2°, the outlier percentages are higher in the CT-free navigation group than in the conventional group. However, there was no significant difference in the tibial sagittal alignment at ±3°.

Conclusion

Computer-assisted surgery does improve mechanical leg axis and component orientation in TKAs. However, high-quality RCTs are necessary to determine whether surgeons could use computer-assisted techniques to achieve a targeted tibial slope in TKA.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic study (Systematic review of Level I/II studies), Level II.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bai YS, Zhang Y, Chen ZQ, Wang CF, Zhao YC, Shi ZC, Li M, Liu KP (2010) Learning curve of computer-assisted navigation system in spine surgery. Chin Med J (Engl) 123:2889–2894

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bankes MJ, Back DL, Cannon SR, Briggs TW (2003) The effect of component malalignment on the clinical and radiological outcome of the kinemax total knee replacement. Knee 10:55–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bargren JH, Blaha JD, Freeman MA (1983) Alignment in total knee arthroplasty: correlated biomechanical and clinical observations. Clin Orthop Relat Res 173:178–183

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bäthis H, Perlick L, Lüring C, Kalteis T, Grifka J (2003) CT-based and CT-free navigation in knee prosthesis implantation: results of a prospective study. Unfallchirurg 106:935–940

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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 Jt Surg Br 86:682–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 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 89:261–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Beaver RJ, Chauhan SK, Scott RG, Breidahl W, Sikorski JM (2006) A prospective randomized controlled trial of computer assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Br 88:475

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bejek Z, Sólyom L, Szendrõi M (2007) Experiences with computer navigated total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 31:617–622

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Berger RA, Crossett LS, Jacobs JJ, Rubash HE (1998) Malrotation causing patellofemoral complications after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 356:144–153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bertsch C, Holz U, Konrad G, Vakili A, Oberst M (2007) Early clinical outcome after navigated total knee arthroplasty. Comparison with conventional implantation in TKA: a controlled and prospective analysis. Orthopade 36:739–745

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Böhling U, Schamberger H, Grittner U, Scholz J (2005) Computerised and technical navigation in total knee-arthroplasty. J Orthopaed Traumatol 6:69–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bonutti PM, Dethmers D, Ulrich SD, Seyler TM, Mont MA (2008) Computer navigationassisted versus minimally invasive TKA: benefits and drawbacks. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:2756–2762

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 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  Google Scholar 

  14. Browne JA, Cook C, Hofmann AA, Bolognesi MP (2010) Postoperative morbidity and mortality following total knee arthroplasty with computer navigation. Knee 17:152–156

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Chauhan SK, Scott RG, Breidahl W, Beaver RJ (2004) Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty versus a conventional jig-based technique: a randomised, prospective trial. J Bone Jt Surg Br 86:372–377

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Cheng T, Liu T, Zhang G, Zhang X (2011) Computer-navigated surgery in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: are radiographic outcomes better than conventional surgery? Arthroscopy 27:97–100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cheng T, Zhang G, Zhang X (2011) Clinical and radiographic outcomes of image-based computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty: an evidence-based evaluation. Surg Innov 18:15–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 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 Arthroplasty 20:618–626

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Choi WC, Lee S, An JH, Kim D, Seong SC, Lee MC (2010) Plain radiograph fails to reflect the alignment and advantages of navigation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2010.07.020

  20. Choong PF, Dowsey MM, Stoney JD (2009) Does accurate anatomical alignment result in better function and quality of life? A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing conventional and computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 24:560–569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chotanaphuti T, Ongnamthip P, Teeraleekul K, Kraturerk C (2008) Comparative study between computer assisted-navigation and conventional technique in minimally invasive surgery total knee arthroplasty, prospective control study. J Med Assoc Thail 91:1382–1388

    Google Scholar 

  22. Church JS, Scadden JE, Gupta RR, Cokis C, Williams KA, Janes GC (2007) Embolic phenomena during computer-assisted and conventional total knee replacement. J Bone Jt Surg Br 89:481–485

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Conteduca F, Massai F, Iorio R, Zanzotto E, Luzon D, Ferretti A (2009) Blood loss in computer-assisted mobile bearing total knee arthroplasty. A comparison of computer-assisted surgery with a conventional technique. Int Orthop 33:1609–1613

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Cummings P (2009) The relative merits of risk ratios and odds ratios. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 163:438–445

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Czurda T, Fennema P, Baumgartner M, Ritschl P (2010) The association between component malalignment and post-operative pain following navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty: results of a cohort/nested case-control study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:863–869

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Dattani R, Patnaik S, Kantak A, Tselentakis G (2009) Navigation knee replacement. Int Orthop 33:7–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. de Ladoucette A (2009) Computer-assisted revision of total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:1166–1171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Decking R, Markmann Y, Fuchs J, Puhl W, Scharf HP (2005) Leg axis after computer navigated total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized trial comparing computer navigated and manual implantation. J Arthroplasty 20:282–288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Deo H, West G, Butcher C, Lewis P (2011) The prevalence of cognitive dysfunction after conventional and computer-assisted total knee replacement. Knee 18:117–120

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. DerSimonian R, Laird N (1986) Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7:177–188

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O’Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L’Abbé KA (1992) Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 45:255–265

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Ensini A, Catani F, Leardini A, Romagnoli M, Giannini S (2007) Alignments and clinical results in conventional and navigated total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 457:156–162

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Fang DM, Ritter MA, Davis KE (2009) Coronal alignment in total knee arthroplasty: just how important is it? J Arthroplasty 24:39–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gandhi R, Dhotar H, Razak F, Tso P, Davey JR, Mahomed NN (2010) Predicting the longer term outcomes of total knee arthroplasty. Knee 17:15–18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Gao H, Luo CF, Hu CF, Zhang CQ, Zeng BF (2011) Minimally invasive fluoro-navigation screw fixation for the treatment of pelvic ring injuries. Surg Innov. doi:10.1177/1553350611399587

  36. Gioe TJ, Sinner P, Mehle S, Ma W, Killeen KK (2007) Excellent survival of all-polyethylene tibial components in a community joint registry. Clin Orthop Relat Res 464:88–92

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Gregori A, Holt G (2007) Re: navigated total knee replacement. A meta-analysis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89:1867–1868

    Google Scholar 

  38. Han HS, Seong SC, Lee S, Lee MC (2006) Rotational alignment of femoral components in total knee arthroplasty: nonimage-based navigation system versus conventional technique. Orthopedics 29:S148–S151

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hart R, Janecek M, Chaker A, Bucek P (2003) Total knee arthroplasty implanted with and without kinematic navigation. Int Orthop 27:366–369

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Hauschild O, Konstantinidis L, Baumann T, Niemeyer P, Suedkamp NP, Helwig P (2010) Correlation of radiographic and navigated measurements of TKA limb alignment: a matter of time? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:1317–1322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Hernández-Vaquero D, Suarez-Vazquez A, Sandoval-Garcia MA, Noriega-Fernandez A (2010) Computer assistance increases precision of component placement in total knee arthroplasty with articular deformity. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:1237–1241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Higgins JP, Thompson SG (2002) Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta analysis. Stat Med 21:1539–1558

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327:557–560

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Hinarejos P, Corrales M, Matamalas A, Bisbe E, Cáceres E (2009) Computer-assisted surgery can reduce blood loss after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:356–360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Hsu WH, Hsu RW, Weng YJ (2010) Effect of preoperative deformity on postoperative leg axis in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:1323–1327

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Incavo SJ, Wild JJ, Coughlin KM, Beynnon BD (2007) Early revision for component malrotation in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 458:131–136

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ishida K, Matsumoto T, Tsumura N, Kubo S, Kitagawa A, Chin T, Iguchi T, Kurosaka M, Kuroda R (2011) Mid-term outcomes of computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:1107–1112

    Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Jenny JY, Boeri C (2001) Computer-assisted implantation of total knee prostheses: a case-control comparative study with classical instrumentation. Comput Aided Surg 6:217–220

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Julin J, Jämsen E, Puolakka T, Konttinen YT, Moilanen T (2010) Younger age increases the risk of early prosthesis failure following primary total knee replacement for osteoarthritis: a follow-up study of 32,019 total knee replacements in the Finnish arthroplasty register. Acta Orthop 81:413–419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Kalairajah Y, Cossey AJ, Verrall GM, Ludbrook G, Spriggins AJ (2006) Are systemic emboli reduced in computer-assisted knee surgery? A prospective, randomised, clinical trial. J Bone Jt Surg Br 88:198–202

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Kalairajah Y, Simpson D, Cossey AJ, Verrall GM, Spriggins AJ (2005) Blood loss after total knee replacement: effects of computer-assisted surgery. J Bone Jt Surg Br 87:1480–1482

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Kim YH, Kim JS, Choi Y, Kwon OR (2009) Computer-assisted surgical navigation does not improve the alignment and orientation of the components in total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 91:14–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Kim YH, Kim JS, Hong KS, Kim YJ, Kim JH (2008) Prevalence of fat embolism after total knee arthroplasty performed with or without computer navigation. J Bone Jt Surg Am 90:123–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Kim YH, Kim JS, Yoon SH (2007) Alignment and orientation of the components in total knee replacement with and without navigation support: a prospective, randomised study. J Bone Jt Surg Br 89:471–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Lee DH, Park JH, Song DI, Padhy D, Jeong WK, Han SB (2010) Accuracy of soft tissue balancing in TKA: comparison between navigation-assisted gap balancing and conventional measured resection. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:381–387

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Lehnen K, Giesinger K, Warschkow R, Porter M, Koch E, Kuster MS (2011) Clinical outcome using a ligament referencing technique in CAS versus conventional technique. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:887–892

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Leun KS (2010) Computer assisted orthopaedic surgery: present status and future perspectives. Chin Med J (Engl) 123:2967–2968

    Google Scholar 

  60. Lim MH, Tallay A, Bartlett J (2009) Comparative study of the use of computer assisted navigation system for axial correction in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:341–346

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. 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 Arthroplasty 24:570–578

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Lützner J, Krummenauer F, Wolf C, Günther KP, Kirschner S (2008) Computer-assisted and conventional total knee replacement: a comparative, prospective, randomised study with radiological and CT evaluation. J Bone Jt Surg Br 90:1039–1044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Maculé-Beneyto F, Hernández-Vaquero D, Segur-Vilalta JM, Colomina-Rodríguez R, Hinarejos-Gomez P, García-Forcada I, Seral Garcia B (2006) Navigation in total knee arthroplasty. A multicenter study. Int Orthop 30:536–540

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Mahaluxmivala J, Bankes MJ, Nicolai P, Aldam CH, Allen PW (2001) The effect of surgeon experience on component positioning in 673 press fit condylar posterior cruciate-sacrificing total knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty 16:635–640

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Martin A, von Strempel A (2005) CT-based and CT-free navigation in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective comparative study with respects to clinical and radiological results. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 143:323–328

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Martin A, Wohlgenannt O, Prenn M, Oelsch C, von Strempel A (2007) Imageless navigation for TKA increases implantation accuracy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 460:178–184

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Mason JB, Fehring TK, Estok R, Banel D, Fahrbach K (2007) Meta-analysis of alignment outcomes in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty 22:1097–1106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Mason JB, Fehring T, Fahrbach K (2007) Navigated total knee replacement. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89:2547–2548

    Google Scholar 

  69. Matziolis G, Krocker D, Weiss U, Tohtz S, Perka C (2007) A prospective, randomized study of computer-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty: 3-D evaluation of implant alignment and rotation. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89:236–243.70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. McAuley L, Pham B, Tugwell P, Moher D (2000) Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 356:1228–1231

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Mielke RK, Clemens U, Jens JH, Kershally S (2001) Navigation in knee endoprosthesis implantation: preliminary experiences and prospective comparative study with conventional implantation technique. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 139:109–116

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Mihalko WM, Boyle J, Clark LD, Krackow KA (2005) The variability of intramedullary alignment of the femoral component during total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 20:25–28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Millar NL, Deakin AH, Millar LL, Kinnimonth AW, Picard F (2011) Blood loss following total knee replacement in the morbidly obese: effects of computer navigation. Knee 18:108–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Minoda Y, Kobayashi A, Iwaki H, Ohashi H, Takaoka K (2009) TKA sagittal alignment with navigation systems and conventional techniques vary only a few degrees. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:1000–1006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Mizu-uchi H, Matsuda S, Miura H, Okazaki K, Akasaki Y, Iwamoto Y (2008) The evaluation of post-operative alignment in total knee replacement using a CT-based navigation system. J Bone Jt Surg Br 90:1025–1031

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Mombert M, Van Den Daelen L, Gunst P, Missinnel L (2007) Navigated total knee arthroplasty: a radiological analysis of 42 randomised cases. Acta Orthop Belg 73:49–54

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Mullaji A, Kanna R, Marawar S, Kohli A, Sharma A (2007) Comparison of limb and component alignment using computer-assisted navigation versus image intensifier-guided conventional total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, single-surgeon study of 467 knees. J Arthroplasty 22:953–959

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Nicoll D, Rowley DI (2010) Internal rotational error of the tibial component is a major cause of pain after total knee replacement. J Bone Jt Surg Br 92:1238–1244

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Oberst M, Bertsch C, Konrad G, Lahm A, Holz U (2008) CT analysis after navigated versus conventional implantation of TKA. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 128:561–566

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Oberst M, Bertsch C, Würstlin S, Holz U (2003) CT analysis of leg alignment after conventional vs navigated knee prosthesis implantation. Initial results of a controlled, prospective and randomized study. Unfallchirurg 106:941–948

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Pang HN, Yeo SJ, Chong HC, Chin PL, Ong J, Lo NN (2011) Computer-assisted gap balancing technique improves outcome in total knee arthroplasty, compared with conventional measured resection technique. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi:10.1007/s00167-011-1483-3

  82. Park SE, Lee CT (2007) Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional manual implantation of a primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 22:1054–1059

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Parratte S, Pagnano MW, Trousdale RT, Berry DJ (2010) Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on the fifteen-year survival of modern, cemented total knee replacements. J Bone Jt Surg Am 92:2143–2149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Perlick L, Bäthis H, Lerch K, Lüring C, Tingart M, Grifka J (2004) Navigated implantation of total knee endoprostheses in secondary knee osteoarthritis of rheumatoid arthritis patients as compared to conventional technique. Z Rheumatol 63:140–146

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Perlick L, Bäthis H, Tingart M, Perlick C, Grifka J (2004) Navigation in total-knee arthroplasty: CT-based implantation compared with the conventional technique. Acta Orthop Scand 75:464–470

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Prasad K, Jaeschke R, Wyer P, Keitz S, Guyatt G (2008) Evidence-based medicine teaching tips working group. Tips for teachers of evidence-based medicine: understanding odds ratios and their relationship to risk ratios. J Gen Intern Med 23:635–640

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Ritter MA (2009) The anatomical graduated component total knee replacement: a long-term evaluation with 20-year survival analysis. J Bone Jt Surg Br 91:745–749

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Robertsson O, Bizjajeva S, Fenstad AM, Furnes O, Lidgren L, Mehnert F, Odgaard A, Pedersen AB, Havelin LI (2010) Knee arthroplasty in Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Acta Orthop 81:82–89

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Sampath SA, Voon SH, Sangster M, Davies H (2009) The statistical relationship between varus deformity, surgeon’s experience, BMI and tourniquet time for computer assisted total knee replacements. Knee 16:121–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Saragaglia D, Picard F, Chaussard C, Montbarbon E, Leitner F, Cinquin P (2001) Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty: comparison with a conventional procedure: results of 50 cases in a prospective randomized study. Rev Chir Orthop Repar Appar Mot 87:18–28

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Schmitt J, Hauk C, Kienapfel H, Pfeiffer M, Efe T, Fuchs-Winkelmann S, Heyse TJ (2011) Navigation of total knee arthroplasty: rotation of components and clinical results in a prospectively randomized study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 12:16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Schnurr C, Csécsei G, Eysel P, König DP (2010) The effect of computer navigation on blood loss and transfusion rate in TKA. Orthopedics 33:474

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Seon JK, Park SJ, Lee KB, Li G, Kozanek M, Song EK (2009) Functional comparison of total knee arthroplasty performed with and without a navigation system. Int Orthop 33:987–990

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Shao JJ, Zhang XL, Wang Q, Chen YS, Shen H, Jiang Y (2010) Total knee arthroplasty using computer assisted navigation in patients with severe valgus deformity of the knee. Chin Med J (Engl) 123:2666–2670

    Google Scholar 

  95. Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Shastri S, Jacoby SM (2002) Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res 404:7–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Shen B, Yang J, Zhou Z, Kang P, Wang L, Pei F (2009) Survivorship comparison of all-polyethylene and metal-backed tibial components in cruciate-substituting total knee arthroplasty: Chinese experience. Int Orthop 33:1243–1247

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Shen H, Zhang N, Zhang X, Ji W (2009) C-reactive protein levels after 4 types of arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 80:330–333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Sikorski JM (2008) Alignment in total knee replacement. J Bone Jt Surg Br. 90:1121–1127

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Siston RA, Giori NJ, Goodman SB, Delp SL (2007) Surgical navigation for total knee arthroplasty: a perspective. J Biomech 40:728–735

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Siston RA, Patel JJ, Goodman SB, Delp SL, Giori NJ (2005) The variability of femoral rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 87:2276–2280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Song EK, Seon JK, Park SJ, Jung WB, Park HW, Lee GW (2011) Simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty with robotic and conventional techniques: a prospective, randomized study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc19:1069–1076

    Google Scholar 

  102. Song EK, Seon JK, Yoon TR, Park SJ, Cho SG, Yim JH (2007) Comparative study of stability after total knee arthroplasties between navigation system and conventional techniques. J Arthroplasty 22:1107–1111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Song F, Eastwood AJ, Gilbody S, Duley L, Sutton AJ (2000) Publication and related biases. Health Technol Assess 4:1–115

    Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  105. Spencer JM, Chauhan SK, Sloan K, Taylor A, Beaver RJ (2007) Computer navigation versus conventional total knee replacement: no difference in functional results at 2 years. J Bone Jt Surg Br 89:477–480

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Spencer SJ, Baird K, Young D, Tait GR (2011) The rotaglide mobile bearing knee arthroplasty. A 10–13 year review from an independent centre. Knee. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2010.11.013

  107. Stöckl B, Nogler M, Rosiek R, Fischer M, Krismer M, Kessler O (2004) Navigation improves accuracy of rotational alignment in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 426:180–186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. van Strien T, der Zwaag E, Kaptein B, van Erkel A, Valstar E, Nelissen R (2009) Computer assisted versus conventional cemented total knee prostheses alignment accuracy and micromotion of the tibial component. Int Orthop 33:1255–1261

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Vavken P, Castellani L, Sculco TP (2009) Prophylaxis of heterotopic ossification of the hip: systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:3283–3289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Victor J, Hoste D (2004) Image-based computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty leads to lower variability in coronal alignment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 428:131–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Weng YJ, Hsu RW, Hsu WH (2009) Comparison of computer-assisted navigation and conventional instrumentation for bilateral total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 24:668–673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Yaffe MA, Koo SS, Stulberg SD (2008) Radiographic and navigation measurements of TKA limb alignment do not correlate. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:2736–2744

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Yang JH, Yoon JR, Pandher DS, Oh KJ (2010) Clinical and radiologic outcomes of contemporary 3 techniques of TKA. Orthopedics 33(Suppl 10):76–81

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Zumstein MA, Frauchiger L, Wyss D, Hess R, Ballmer PM (2006) Is restricted femoral navigation sufficient for accuracy of total knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 451:80–86

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank all corresponding authors from the included studies for their assistance in obtaining relevant data that contributed to our study.

Conflict of interest

Each author certifies that he or she has no commercial associations (e.g., consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 600 Yisan Road, Shanghai, 200233, People’s Republic of China

    Tao Cheng, Song Zhao, Xiaochun Peng & Xianlong Zhang

Authors
  1. Tao Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Song Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiaochun Peng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xianlong Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xianlong Zhang.

Additional information

This work was performed at the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cheng, T., Zhao, S., Peng, X. et al. 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, 1307–1322 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1588-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1588-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation