Methods:

8 fresh-frozen cadaveric pelvis specimens underwent Computer Tomography (CT) in order to create a 3D reconstruction of the acetabulum. Based on these 3D reconstruction, a pre-operative plan was made positioning the patient specific acetabulum guides at 40 degrees of inclination and 20 degrees of anteversion in the pelvis.(Figure 1) The guides were created based on the specific bony morphology of the acetabular notch and rim. The guides were created using a 3D printer which allowed for precise recreation of the virtual model. 7 cadaveric specimens underwent creation and implantation of a acetabular guide specific to each specimens bony morphology. Ligamentum, pulvinar, and labum were removed for each cadaver prior to implantation to prevent soft tissue obstruction. The guides were inserted into the acetabular notch with the final position based on the fit of the guide in the notch. (Figure 2) Post-implantation CT was then performed and inclination and anteversion of the implanted guide measured and compared to the preoperative plan.

Materials and Methods:

30 THAs performed using the robotic navigation system (robotic cohort) were available for review, and compared to the most recent 30 THAs performed using the imageless, CAS system (CAS cohort). The final, intraoperative reading for acetabular abduction and anteversion provided by each navigation system was recorded following each THA. Einsel-Bild-Roentgen analysis was used to measure the acetabular component abduction and anteversion based on anteroposterior pelvis radiographs obtained at each patient's first, postoperative visit (Figure 1). Two observers, blinded to the treatment arms, independently measured all the acetabular components, and the results were assessed for inter-observer reliability.

Comparing the difference between the final, intraoperative reading for both acetabular abduction and anteversion, and the radiographic alignment calculated using EBRA analysis, allowed assessment of the intraoperative predictive capability of each system, and accuracy in determining the postoperative acetabular component position. In addition, the number of acetabular components outside of the “safe zone” (40° + 10° of abduction, 15° + 10° of anteversion), as described by Lewinnek et al., was assessed. Lastly, the operative time for each surgery was recorded.

METHODS

A software program was implemented which creates an e.Label for all components (Figure 1) and checks imbedded, manufacturer provided, compatibility charts to ensure that parts are of appropriate laterality, and are compatible with each other. Upon implementation, the program was studied prospectively for seven months and compared to a retrospective cohort in regards to number, type, and cost of wasted implants. Critical errors that were detected were also recorded.

Methods

After obtaining IRB approval, nine fresh-frozen cadaver legs from hip-to-toe underwent TKA with a posterior stabilized implant (APEX PS, OMNIlife Science, Inc.) using a computer navigation system equipped with a robotic cutting-guide, in this controlled laboratory cadaveric study. After the initial tibial and femoral resections were performed, the flexion and extension gaps were balanced using navigation, and a 4 mm recut was made in the distal femur. The remaining femoral cuts were made, the femoral component was downsized by resecting an additional 4 mm of bone off the posterior condyles, and the polyethylene was increased by 4 mm to create a situation of a well-balanced knee with an elevated joint line. Real implants were used in the study to eliminate any inherent error or laxity in the trials. The navigation system was used to measure overall coronal plane laxity by measuring the mechanical alignment angle at maximum extension, 30, 45, 60 and 90 degrees of flexion, when applying a standardized varus/valgus load of 9.8 [Nm] across the knee using a 4 kg spring-load located at 25 cm distal to the knee joint line (Figure 1). Coronal plane laxity was defined as the absolute difference (in degrees) between the mean mechanical alignment angle obtained from applying a standardized varus and valgus stress at 0, 30, 45, 60 and 90 degrees. Each measurement was performed three separate times.

Two tailed student t-tests were performed to analyze whether there was difference in the mean mechanical alignment angle at 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, and 90° between the well balanced scenario and following a 4 mm joint line elevation with an otherwise well balanced knee.

Purpose

We aimed to assess the accuracy of intra-operative pelvic tilt adjusted anteversion measurements as compared to unadjusted measurements.

Methods

After obtaining IRB approval, six fresh-frozen cadaver legs from hip-to-toe underwent TKA with a posterior stabilized implant (APEX PS OMNIlife Science, Inc.) using a computer navigation system equipped with a robotic cutting-guide, in this controlled laboratory cadaveric study. After the initial tibial and femoral resections were performed, and the flexion and extension gaps were balanced using navigation, a 4 mm distal recut was made in the distal femur to create a loose extension gap (using the same thickness of polyethylene as the well-balanced case). Real implants were used in the study to eliminate error in any laxity inherent to the trials. The navigation system was used to measure overall coronal plane laxity by measuring the mechanical alignment angle at maximum extension, 30, 45, 60 and 90 degrees of flexion, when applying a standardized varus/valgus load of 9.8 [Nm] across the knee using a 4 kg spring-load located at 25 cm distal to the knee joint line. (Figure 1). Coronal plane laxity was defined as the absolute difference (in degrees) between the mean mechanical alignment angle obtained from applying a standardized varus and valgus stress at 0, 30, 45, 60 and 90 degrees. Each measurement was performed three separate times.

Two tailed student t-tests were performed to analyze whether there was difference in the mean mechanical alignment angle at 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, and 90° between the well balanced scenario and following a 4 mm recut in the distal femur creating a loose extension gap.

Methods

62 consecutive patients, and a total of 80 knees, received a posterior cruciate substituting TKA using the Achieve CAS computer navigation system. Subsequently, 65 consecutive patients, and a total of 80 knees, received a posterior cruciate substituting TKA using the KneeAlignÒ 2 to perform both the distal femoral and proximal tibial resections (femoral guide seen in Figure 1, and tibial guide seen in Figure 2). Postoperatively, standing AP hip-to-ankle radiographs were obtained for each patient, from which the lower extremity mechanical axis, tibial component varus/valgus mechanical alignment, and femoral component varus/valgus mechanical alignment were digitally measured. Each measurement was performed by two, blinded independent observers, and interclass correlation for each measurement was calculated. All procedures were performed using a thigh pneumatic tourniquet, and the total tourniquet time for each procedure was recorded.

Methods

Seven fresh-frozen cadaver legs from hip-to-toe underwent TKA with a posterior stabilized implant using a measured resection technique with computer navigation system equipped with a robotic cutting-guide, in this IRB approved, controlled laboratory study. After the initial tibial and femoral resections were performed, the posterior joint capsule was sutured (imbricated) through the joint space under direct visualization until a 10° flexion contracture was obtained with the trial components in place, as confirmed by computer navigation. Two distal femoral recuts of +2mm each where then subsequently made and after the remaining femoral cuts were made, the trail implants were reinserted. The navigation system was used to measure overall coronal plane laxity by measuring the mechanical alignment angle at maximum extension, 30°, 60° and 90° of flexion, when applying a standardized varus/valgus load of 9.8 [Nm] across the knee using a 4kg spring-load located at 25cm distal to the knee joint line.(Figure 1) Coronal plane laxity was defined as the absolute difference (in °) between the mean mechanical alignment angle obtained from applying a standardized varus and valgus stress at 0°, 30, 60° and 90°. Each measurement was performed three separate times and averaged.

The maximal extension angle achieved following each 2mm distal recut was also recorded. Two-tailed student's t-tests were performed to analyze whether there was difference in the mean laxity at each angle and if there was a significant improvement in maximal extension with each recut. P-values < 0.05 were considered significant.

Methods

After IRB approval, two cadaveric specimens were used for a pilot study to determine sample size. Five fresh-frozen hip-to-toe cadaveric specimens then underwent TKA using an anatomic measured resection technique with a computer-navigated robotic femoral cutting-guide. The PS, BCS, and UC TKA designs were implanted in each knee using the same distal and posterior femoral cuts to standardize the position of the implants. Computer navigation was then utilized to record the varus/valgus laxity of each implant at 0°, 30°, 60° and 90° of flexion while applying a standardized 9.8Nm moment.

Passive tibiofemoral kinematics were measured in a continuous passive motion machine from 10° to 110°. Femoral rollback on the tibia was calculated for the native and replaced knees by measuring the closest point (CP) on the femoral condyle to a transverse plane perpendicular to the mechanical axis of the tibia at each flexion angle.