Skip to main content
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20120919-56

Abstract

The next generational leap in computer navigation will hopefully aid surgeons in personalizing surgical techniques to patients’ individual anatomical variables to optimize outcomes. To effectively use the information obtained in the operating room, a multitude of kinematic variables must be conveyed to the orthopedic surgeon in a usable and coherent manner. This study used an intraoperative navigation system to record passive knee kinematics after a total knee arthroplastyperformed. The clinical measures were taken via research software with the ability to record kinematic data in 10-second intervals.

The data from 10 consecutive clinical cases were averaged, and the translation (anterior/posterior) and rotation (internal/external) were recorded and compared from 0° to 100° of flexion to allow for comparison with the previously recorded computer model. Model and clinical curves compared favorably, with less than 1° rotational and 1.5-mm differences, on average.

The comparison of information and analyses were reviewed to indicate how they might be interpreted in the operating room for future use during surgery to allow a more personalized approach to improving functional outcomes after total knee arthroplasty.

  • 1.Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the US from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89:780–785.10.2106/JBJS.F.00222

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2.Parratte S, Pagnano MW, Trousdale RT, Berry DJ. Effect of postoperative mechanical axis alignment on the fifteen-year survival of modern, cemented total knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010; 92(12):2143–2149.10.2106/JBJS.I.01398

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 3.Werner FW, Ayers DC, Maletsky LP, Rullkoetter PJ. The effect of valgus/varus malalignment on load distribution in total knee replacements. J Biomech. 2005; 38(2):349–355.10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.02.024

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4.Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Shastri S, Jacoby SM. Insall Award paper. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today?Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002; (404):7–13.10.1097/00003086-200211000-00003

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 5.Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KD. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not?Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010; 468(1):57–63.10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 6.Gandhi R, Tso P, Davis A, Mahomed NN. Outcomes of total joint arthroplasty in academic versus community hospitals. Can J Surg. 2009; 52(5):413–416.

    Google Scholar
  • 7.Mannion AF, Kämpfen S, Munzinger U, Kramers-de Quervain I. The role of patient expectations in predicting outcome after total knee arthroplasty. Arthritis Res Ther. 2009; 11(5):R139.10.1186/ar2811

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8.Choong PF, Dowsey MM, Stoney JD. Does accurate anatomical alignment result in better function and quality of life? Comparing conventional and computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2009; 24(4):560–569.10.1016/j.arth.2008.02.018

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 9.Barrack RL, Schrader T, Bertot AJ, Wolfe MW, Myers L. Component rotation and anterior knee pain after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001; (392):46–55.10.1097/00003086-200111000-00006

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 10.Fehring TK. Rotational malalignment of the femoral component in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000; (380):72–79.10.1097/00003086-200011000-00010

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11.Zihlmann MS, Stacoff A, Romero J, Quervain IK, Stüssi E. Biomechanical background and clinical observations of rotational malalignment in TKA: literature review and consequences. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2005; 20(7):661–668.10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2005.03.014

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 12.Berger RA, Crossett LS, Jacobs JJ, Rubash HE. Malrotation causing patellofemoral complications after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998; (356):144–153.10.1097/00003086-199811000-00021

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13.Mihalko WM, Williams JL. Tibial component transverse plane malrotation effects in TKA. Orthopedics. 2010; 33(10):71–75.10.3928/01477447-20100510-57

    LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 14.Li G, Suggs J, Hanson G, Durbhakula S, Johnson T, Freiberg A. Three-dimensional tibiofemoral articular contact kinematics of a cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006; 88(2):395–402.10.2106/JBJS.D.03028

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 15.Mihalko WM, Lindsey J, Knox D, Conner D, Williams JL. Effects of transverse plane alignment on kinematics after TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012; 470(1):186–192.10.1007/s11999-011-2145-y

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 16.Mihalko WM, Bayers-Thering M, Phillips MJ, Krackow KA. Epicondylar axis alignment in deformity measure in TKA patients. Paper presented at: 2009 AAOS Annual Meeting; February 25–28, 2009; Las Vegas, Nevada.

    Google Scholar
  • 17.Johnson C, Hull ML. Parameter identification of the human lower limb under dynamic, transient torsional loading. J Biomech. 1988; 21(5):401–415.10.1016/0021-9290(88)90146-7

    CrossrefGoogle Scholar

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. For a complete overview of all the cookies used, please see our privacy policy.

×
  • Published online9/19/12 12:00 AM
  • __article__history--ppub10/1/12 12:00 AM