Deviation between navigated and final 3-dimensional implant position in mini-invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty A pilot study in 13 patients

被引:4
作者
Martinez-Carranza, Nicolas [1 ,2 ]
Weidenhielm, Lars [1 ,3 ]
Crafoord, Joakim [4 ]
Hedstrom, Margareta [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Karolinska Univ Hosp, Dept Orthopaed, Stockholm, Sweden
[2] Karolinska Inst, Inst Clin Sci Intervent & Technol CLINTEC, Stockholm, Sweden
[3] Karolinska Inst, Dept Mol Med & Surg, Stockholm, Sweden
[4] Karolinska Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, Stockholm, Sweden
关键词
ALIGNMENT; REPLACEMENT; COMPONENT; ACCURACY; FAILURE;
D O I
10.3109/17453674.2012.736840
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and purpose Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is an established method of treating isolated gonartrosis. Modern techniques such as computer-assisted surgery (CAS) and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) are attractive complementary methods to UKA. However, the positioning of the components remains a concern. Thus, we performed a prospective study to assess whether there was deviation between the navigated implant position and the final implant position. Patients and methods We performed UKA with MIS and CAS in 13 patients. By comparing intraoperative navigation data with postoperative computed tomography (CT) measurements, we calculated the deviation between the computer-assisted implant position and the final 3-D implant position of the femoral and tibial components. Results The computer-assisted placement of the femoral and tibial component showed adequate position and consistent results regarding flexion-extension and varus-valgus. However, regarding rotation there was a large variation and 6 of 10 patients were outside the target range for both the femoral component and the tibial component. Interpretation Difficulties in assessing anatomical landmarks with the CAS in combination with MIS might be a reason for the poor rotational alignment of the components.
引用
收藏
页码:625 / 628
页数:4
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]  
BARRETT WP, 1987, J BONE JOINT SURG AM, V69A, P1328
[2]   Alignment in total knee arthroplasty -: A comparison of computer-assisted surgery with the conventional technique [J].
Bäthis, H ;
Perlick, L ;
Tingart, M ;
Lüring, C ;
Zurakowski, D ;
Grifka, J .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 2004, 86B (05) :682-687
[3]   Unicompartmental knee replacement [J].
Bert, JM .
ORTHOPEDIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2005, 36 (04) :513-+
[4]   Alignment deviation between bone resection and final implant positioning in computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty [J].
Catani, Fabio ;
Biasca, Nicola ;
Ensini, Andrea ;
Leardini, Alberto ;
Bianchi, Luca ;
Digennaro, Vitantonio ;
Giannini, Sandro .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2008, 90A (04) :765-771
[5]   Revision of unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee - Clinical and technical considerations [J].
Chakrabarty, G ;
Newman, JH ;
Ackroyd, CE .
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 1998, 13 (02) :191-196
[6]  
COLLIER JP, 1991, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P232
[7]  
Deshmukh RV, 2001, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P272
[8]   Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for the treatment of unicompartmental osteoarthritis: A systematic study [J].
Griffin, Tabatha ;
Rowden, Neville ;
Morgan, David ;
Atkinson, Robert ;
Woodruff, Peter ;
Maddern, Guy .
ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2007, 77 (04) :214-221
[9]   No deterioration of kinematics and cruciate function 10 years after medial unicompartmental arthroplasty [J].
Hollinghurst, D. ;
Stoney, J. ;
Ward, T. ;
Gill, H. S. ;
Newman, J. H. ;
Murray, D. W. ;
Beard, D. J. .
KNEE, 2006, 13 (06) :440-444
[10]   Computer assisted navigation in total knee arthroplasty - Improved coronal alignment [J].
Kim, SJ ;
MacDonald, M ;
Hernandez, J ;
Wixson, RL .
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2005, 20 (07) :123-131