Electromagnetic navigation in total knee arthroplasty—a single center, randomized, single-blind study comparing the results with conventional techniques

Mark J.G. Blyth, Julie R. Smith, Iain C. Anthony, Neville E. Strict, Philip J. Rowe, Bryn G. Jones

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We report on the results of a randomized study (n = 200) to compare total knee arthroplasty performed using conventional instrumentation or electromagnetic computer assisted surgical technique. 92% of navigated and 85% of conventional knees were implanted within ± 3° from neutral mechanical alignment; there was no statistically significant difference between these proportions. There was also no difference in femoral or tibial rotation assessed by CT scan. At 1 year follow up there was no statistical difference between the two groups in American Knee Society Score, Oxford Knee Scores, patient satisfaction, quality of life, hospital length of stay, complication rates or other adverse events. Tourniquet time in the navigated group was longer. Proving value for navigation in total knee arthroplasty surgery remains a challenge.
LanguageEnglish
Pages199-205
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Arthroplasty
Volume30
Issue number2
Early online date16 Sep 2014
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2015

Fingerprint

Single-Blind Method
Knee Replacement Arthroplasties
Electromagnetic Phenomena
Length of Stay
Knee
Tourniquets
Thigh
Patient Satisfaction
Quality of Life

Keywords

  • EM navigation
  • total knee arthroplasty
  • randomized controlled trial
  • mechanical alignment
  • surgical accuracy
  • clinical outcome

Cite this

Blyth, Mark J.G. ; Smith, Julie R. ; Anthony, Iain C. ; Strict, Neville E. ; Rowe, Philip J. ; Jones, Bryn G. / Electromagnetic navigation in total knee arthroplasty—a single center, randomized, single-blind study comparing the results with conventional techniques. In: Journal of Arthroplasty. 2015 ; Vol. 30, No. 2. pp. 199-205.
@article{50bf31410a9e4c029d06df6d18b9140b,
title = "Electromagnetic navigation in total knee arthroplasty—a single center, randomized, single-blind study comparing the results with conventional techniques",
abstract = "We report on the results of a randomized study (n = 200) to compare total knee arthroplasty performed using conventional instrumentation or electromagnetic computer assisted surgical technique. 92{\%} of navigated and 85{\%} of conventional knees were implanted within ± 3° from neutral mechanical alignment; there was no statistically significant difference between these proportions. There was also no difference in femoral or tibial rotation assessed by CT scan. At 1 year follow up there was no statistical difference between the two groups in American Knee Society Score, Oxford Knee Scores, patient satisfaction, quality of life, hospital length of stay, complication rates or other adverse events. Tourniquet time in the navigated group was longer. Proving value for navigation in total knee arthroplasty surgery remains a challenge.",
keywords = "EM navigation, total knee arthroplasty, randomized controlled trial, mechanical alignment, surgical accuracy, clinical outcome",
author = "Blyth, {Mark J.G.} and Smith, {Julie R.} and Anthony, {Iain C.} and Strict, {Neville E.} and Rowe, {Philip J.} and Jones, {Bryn G.}",
year = "2015",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.arth.2014.09.008",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "199--205",
journal = "Journal of Arthroplasty",
issn = "1532-8406",
number = "2",

}

Electromagnetic navigation in total knee arthroplasty—a single center, randomized, single-blind study comparing the results with conventional techniques. / Blyth, Mark J.G.; Smith, Julie R.; Anthony, Iain C.; Strict, Neville E.; Rowe, Philip J.; Jones, Bryn G.

In: Journal of Arthroplasty, Vol. 30, No. 2, 02.2015, p. 199-205.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Electromagnetic navigation in total knee arthroplasty—a single center, randomized, single-blind study comparing the results with conventional techniques

AU - Blyth, Mark J.G.

AU - Smith, Julie R.

AU - Anthony, Iain C.

AU - Strict, Neville E.

AU - Rowe, Philip J.

AU - Jones, Bryn G.

PY - 2015/2

Y1 - 2015/2

N2 - We report on the results of a randomized study (n = 200) to compare total knee arthroplasty performed using conventional instrumentation or electromagnetic computer assisted surgical technique. 92% of navigated and 85% of conventional knees were implanted within ± 3° from neutral mechanical alignment; there was no statistically significant difference between these proportions. There was also no difference in femoral or tibial rotation assessed by CT scan. At 1 year follow up there was no statistical difference between the two groups in American Knee Society Score, Oxford Knee Scores, patient satisfaction, quality of life, hospital length of stay, complication rates or other adverse events. Tourniquet time in the navigated group was longer. Proving value for navigation in total knee arthroplasty surgery remains a challenge.

AB - We report on the results of a randomized study (n = 200) to compare total knee arthroplasty performed using conventional instrumentation or electromagnetic computer assisted surgical technique. 92% of navigated and 85% of conventional knees were implanted within ± 3° from neutral mechanical alignment; there was no statistically significant difference between these proportions. There was also no difference in femoral or tibial rotation assessed by CT scan. At 1 year follow up there was no statistical difference between the two groups in American Knee Society Score, Oxford Knee Scores, patient satisfaction, quality of life, hospital length of stay, complication rates or other adverse events. Tourniquet time in the navigated group was longer. Proving value for navigation in total knee arthroplasty surgery remains a challenge.

KW - EM navigation

KW - total knee arthroplasty

KW - randomized controlled trial

KW - mechanical alignment

KW - surgical accuracy

KW - clinical outcome

UR - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883540314006640

U2 - 10.1016/j.arth.2014.09.008

DO - 10.1016/j.arth.2014.09.008

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - 199

EP - 205

JO - Journal of Arthroplasty

T2 - Journal of Arthroplasty

JF - Journal of Arthroplasty

SN - 1532-8406

IS - 2

ER -