header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

98. REVISION TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY AND NAVIGATION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY



Abstract

Purpose of the study: Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is becoming a routine procedure. The technical problems are greater than with a first-intention implantation because of the potential malposition of the initial implants, loss of bone stock, and prior ligament injury. It could be hypothesised that as for implantation of a primary TKA, navigation might improve the quality of the implantation.

Material and methods: We used the Orthopilot™ (Aesculap, RFA) navigation system for first-intention TKA. The standard software was used for revisions. The acquisition of the anatomic and kinematic data was performed while the initial implants in situ. The implants were then removed. Any bone recuts required were done under navigation control. The size of the implants and their thickness were determined after digital simulation of residual laxity; ligament balance was adapted from this data. The system does not allow navigation for centromedullary stem extensions nor for filling potential bone defects. Sixty patients underwent the procedure. There was a comparative series of 30 patients who underwent manual conventional revision using an instrumentation guided by the centromedullary femoral and tibial stems. The quality of the implantation was determined by measuring the alignment of the limb and the orientation of the implants on the postoperative x-rays. Outcome was analysed with Student’s t test and the chi-square test with p< 0.05 taken as significant.

Results: There was a significant improvement in quality of the implantation for all radiographic criteria in the navigation group. Limb alignment was restored in 88% of the navigated cases and 73% of the conventional cases. Similar differences were observed for femoral and tibial implant position on the lateral and AP views.

Discussion: The objectives set for implant orientation and ligament balance can be met with the navigation system for the majority of knees, with a rate similar to that achieved with primary implantation. The navigation system is an appreciable aid for these often difficult procedures where visual information can be misleading.

Conclusion: The navigation system used here facilitated revision TKA.

Correspondence should be addressed to Ghislaine Patte at sofcot@sofcot.fr