Cargando…

After 25 years of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty, where do we stand today?

BACKGROUND: Limb and implant alignment along with soft tissue balance plays a vital role in the outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Computer navigation for TKA was first introduced in 1997 with the aim of implanting the prosthetic components with accuracy and precision. This review discuss...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Shah, Siddharth M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8796491/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35236503
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42836-021-00100-9
_version_ 1784641339852324864
author Shah, Siddharth M.
author_facet Shah, Siddharth M.
author_sort Shah, Siddharth M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Limb and implant alignment along with soft tissue balance plays a vital role in the outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Computer navigation for TKA was first introduced in 1997 with the aim of implanting the prosthetic components with accuracy and precision. This review discusses the technique, current status, and scientific evidence pertaining to computer-navigated TKA. BODY: The adoption of navigated TKA has slowly but steadily increased across the globe since its inception 25 years ago. It has been more rapid in some countries like Australia than others, like the UK. Contemporary, large console-based navigation systems help control almost every aspect of TKA, including the depth and orientation of femoral and tibial resections, soft-tissue release, and customization of femoral and tibial implant positions in order to obtain desired alignment and balance. Navigated TKA results in better limb and implant alignment and reduces outliers as compared to conventional TKA. However, controversy still exists over whether improved alignment provides superior function and longevity. Surgeons may also be hesitant to adopt this technology due to the associated learning curve, slightly increased surgical time, fear of pin site complications, and the initial set-up cost. Furthermore, the recent advent of robotic-assisted TKA which provides benefits like precision in bone resections and avoiding soft-tissue damage due to uncontrolled sawing, in addition to those of computer navigation, might be responsible for the latter technology taking a backseat. CONCLUSION: This review summarizes the current state of computer-navigated TKA. The superiority of computer navigation to conventional TKA in improving accuracy is well established. Robotic-assisted TKA provides enhanced functionality as compared to computer navigation but is significantly more expensive. Whether robotic-assisted TKA offers any substantive advantages over navigation is yet to be conclusively proven. Irrespective of the form, the use of computer-assisted TKA is on the rise worldwide and is here to stay.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8796491
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87964912022-02-03 After 25 years of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty, where do we stand today? Shah, Siddharth M. Arthroplasty Review BACKGROUND: Limb and implant alignment along with soft tissue balance plays a vital role in the outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Computer navigation for TKA was first introduced in 1997 with the aim of implanting the prosthetic components with accuracy and precision. This review discusses the technique, current status, and scientific evidence pertaining to computer-navigated TKA. BODY: The adoption of navigated TKA has slowly but steadily increased across the globe since its inception 25 years ago. It has been more rapid in some countries like Australia than others, like the UK. Contemporary, large console-based navigation systems help control almost every aspect of TKA, including the depth and orientation of femoral and tibial resections, soft-tissue release, and customization of femoral and tibial implant positions in order to obtain desired alignment and balance. Navigated TKA results in better limb and implant alignment and reduces outliers as compared to conventional TKA. However, controversy still exists over whether improved alignment provides superior function and longevity. Surgeons may also be hesitant to adopt this technology due to the associated learning curve, slightly increased surgical time, fear of pin site complications, and the initial set-up cost. Furthermore, the recent advent of robotic-assisted TKA which provides benefits like precision in bone resections and avoiding soft-tissue damage due to uncontrolled sawing, in addition to those of computer navigation, might be responsible for the latter technology taking a backseat. CONCLUSION: This review summarizes the current state of computer-navigated TKA. The superiority of computer navigation to conventional TKA in improving accuracy is well established. Robotic-assisted TKA provides enhanced functionality as compared to computer navigation but is significantly more expensive. Whether robotic-assisted TKA offers any substantive advantages over navigation is yet to be conclusively proven. Irrespective of the form, the use of computer-assisted TKA is on the rise worldwide and is here to stay. BioMed Central 2021-11-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8796491/ /pubmed/35236503 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42836-021-00100-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Review
Shah, Siddharth M.
After 25 years of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty, where do we stand today?
title After 25 years of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty, where do we stand today?
title_full After 25 years of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty, where do we stand today?
title_fullStr After 25 years of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty, where do we stand today?
title_full_unstemmed After 25 years of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty, where do we stand today?
title_short After 25 years of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty, where do we stand today?
title_sort after 25 years of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty, where do we stand today?
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8796491/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35236503
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42836-021-00100-9
work_keys_str_mv AT shahsiddharthm after25yearsofcomputernavigatedtotalkneearthroplastywheredowestandtoday