Accelerometer-based Navigation Research Articles

A novel imageless accelerometer-based navigation system improves acetabular cup placement accuracy during total hip arthroplasty in the lateral decubitus position.

The accuracy of acetabular cup placement using conventional portable imageless navigation systems in total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the lateral decubitus position remains challenging. Several novel portable imageless navigation systems have been developed recently to improve cup placement accuracy in THA. This study compared the accuracy of acetabular cup placement using a conventional accelerometer-based portable navigation (c-APN) system and a novel accelerometer-based portable navigation (n-APN) system during THA in the lateral decubitus position. This retrospective cohort study compared 45 THAs using the c-APN and 45 THAs using the n-APN system. The primary outcomes were the absolute errors between the intraoperative and postoperative values of acetabular cup radiographic inclination and anteversion angles and the percentage of cases with absolute errors within 5°. Intraoperative values were shown on navigation systems, and postoperative measurements were conducted using computed tomography images. The median absolute errors of the cup inclination angles were significantly smaller in the n-APN group than in the c-APN group (3.9° [interquartile range 2.2°-6.0°] versus 2.2° [interquartile range 1.0°-3.3°]; P = 0.002). Additionally, the median absolute errors of the cup anteversion angles were significantly smaller in the n-APN group than in the c-APN group (4.4° [interquartile range 2.4°-6.5°] versus 1.9° [interquartile range 0.8°-2.7°]; P < 0.001). Significant differences were observed in the percentage of cases with absolute errors within 5° of inclination (c-APN group 67% versus n-APN group 84%; P = 0.049) and anteversion angles (c-APN group 62% versus n-APN group 91%; P = 0.001). The n-APN system improved the accuracy of the cup placement compared to the c-APN system for THA in the lateral decubitus position.

A Comparative Evaluation of Conventional Instrumentation and Accelerometer-Based Navigation in the Practice of a High-Volume Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) Surgeon

BackgroundComponent malpositioning and joint malalignment following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) increase the risk for revision. This study investigates whether accelerometer-based navigation (NAV) decreases radiographic outliers with respect to component placement and joint alignment in comparison to conventional instrumentation in UKA. MethodsA radiographic review of UKAs was performed by a single surgeon following adoption of an accelerometry-guided navigation system (OrthAlign, Aliso Viejo, CA). This cohort was then compared to previous patients undergoing UKA with conventional instrumentation. Six-week postoperative radiographs were used to compare femoral coronal and sagittal angles, tibial coronal and sagittal angles, the net coronal angle, tibial component rotation, and medial tibial overhang. Outliers in implant positioning were compared between groups. Patient variables including age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiology, and surgical time (incision until the start of closure) were also compared between groups. ResultsEighty-eight UKA’s were reviewed (49 conventional instrumentation [CI] patients; 39 NAV patients). Using 2-sample t-tests, no significant differences were found in patient demographics, radiographic parameters, and operative times between the CI and NAV cohorts. Using chi-squared tests, no significant difference was found in the number of radiographic outliers between the CI and NAV cohorts. ConclusionsOur study found that a high-volume UKA surgeon achieved a low rate of radiographic outliers in both NAV and CI cohorts. This data suggests that NAV is no different from conventional instrumentation with respect to implant positioning, overall joint alignment, and operative time when used by a high-volume UKA surgeon.

Femoral prosthesis alignment of augmented reality-assisted versus accelerometer-based navigation in total knee arthroplasty: A noninferiority analysis

IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to examine the comparative precision of the augmented reality (AR)-assisted navigation system and the accelerometer-based navigation system in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Materials and methodsWe performed noninferiority analysis in a retrospective cohort. The coronal alignment of femoral prosthesis was compared between 109 TKAs performed using the AR-assisted navigation system and 118 TKAs performed using the accelerometer-based navigation system. All femoral prostheses were planned to be positioned perpendicular to the mechanical axis of the femur. The primary outcome was the success rate of coronal alignment of the femoral prosthesis defined as alignment error relative to neutral alignment <3°. We calculated the noninferiority margin as 7%-points using the 95%–95 % method and also confirmed the validity of the noninferiority margin using the fixed margin method. Noninferiority would be shown if the lower boundary of the 95 % confidence interval (CI) for the between-group difference in percentage of the success rate was not less than 0.93 (i.e., 1.00 − 0.07). ResultsTreatment success was achieved in 104 of 109 patients (95.4 %) in the AR-assisted navigation group and 110 of 118 (93.2 %) in the accelerometer-based navigation group. The risk ratio of success between the AR-assisted navigation group versus accelerometer-based navigation group was 1.02 (95 % CI, 0.96 to 1.09): the CIs did not include the noninferiority margin of 0.93. ConclusionThe AR-assisted navigation system was noninferior to the accelerometer-based navigation system in terms of coronal alignment of the femoral prosthesis in TKA.

Combined Anteversion Technique for Total Hip Arthroplasty With Handheld Accelerometer-Based Navigation System.

IV (technical note).

Accuracy and outcome of a handheld accelerometer-based navigation device compared to conventional alignment method in total knee arthroplasty in a Chinese population

Background Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a successful procedure in treatment of degenerative disease of the knee, and optimal component placement is essential for long-term implant survival. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the accelerometer-based KneeAlign 2 (KA2) navigation system against conventional methods for accurate positioning of the femoral and tibial components in TKA in a Chinese population. Methods A total of 123 (37 conventional and 86 KA2) cases of elective primary TKA were reviewed. Hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle, mechanical lateral distal femoral angle (mLDFA), and anatomical lateral distal femoral angle (aLDFA) were measured from hip-to-ankle EOS radiographs. Accuracy of conventional alignment and KA2 navigation system was assessed by measuring the difference between intraoperative goal and postoperative radiographic measurements of the components for each respective case. Results There was no significant difference between conventional alignment methods and KA2 navigation in achieving a neutral mechanical alignment of the lower limb. KA2 navigation was significantly more accurate than conventional alignment methods for optimal positioning of the tibial component in both the coronal and sagittal plane, while no significant difference between the two groups was appreciated in the positioning of the femoral component in the coronal plane. Conclusions TKA using the accelerometer-based KA2 system was found to offer a high degree of accuracy in component alignment, and in particular, significantly improved tibial component alignment in comparison with conventional alignment methods in a Chinese population. However, no significant improvements were observed in neutral mechanical axis of the lower limb alignment and femoral component placement in the coronal plane.

Accuracy comparison of cup positioning during total hip arthroplasty using Hip Align and AR-Hip in the supine position.

The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy of acetabular cup positioning between the accelerometer-based navigation system and the augmented reality-based navigation system during THA in the supine position. This retrospective study included 66 patients (70 hips) who underwent THA using two types of portable navigation system, Hip Align or AR-Hip, in the spine position. The absolute difference between the intraoperative navigation record and postoperative measurement using computed tomography data was evaluated. Preoperative clinical factors that decreased the accuracy of cup positioning by ≥ 3° were analyzed via multiple logistic regression analyses. The average absolute error of inclination was 2.8 ± 2.6° in Hip Align and 2.7 ± 1.8° in AR-Hip, and absolute anteversion error was 2.5 ± 2.0° in Hip Align and 2.6 ± 2.2° in AR-Hip, and there was no significantly different between the two navigation systems. There was a significant association between the absolute measurement error (≥ 3°) of cup inclination and patients' BMI in the Hip Align group [odds ratio (OR) 1.350; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.035-1.760; p = 0.027], but not in the AR-Hip group. The accuracy of the acetabular cup positioning between the Hip Align and AR-Hip showed no difference during THA in the spine position. The high BMI could have negative influence on the accuracy of cup positioning in THA using Hip Align, thus AR-Hip could be designable for obesity patients.

Does the accelerometer-based navigation system reduce blood loss and transfusion in one-stage sequential bilateral total knee arthroplasty? A randomized double-blind controlled trial

BackgroundTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) is associated with significant blood loss and postoperative transfusion. The accelerometer-based navigation (ABN) system guides the bone cutting plane without breaching the intramedullary canal, which may reduce bleeding. This study aimed to investigate blood loss and transfusion compared between the ABN system and the conventional procedure in patients undergoing one-stage sequential bilateral TKA (SBTKA).MethodsA total of 66 patients scheduled for SBTKA were randomly allocated to either the ABN or conventional group. Postoperative hematocrit (Hct) level, drainage blood loss, transfusion rate, and amount of packed red cell transfusion were collected. Total red blood cell (RBC) loss was then calculated for the primary outcome.ResultsThe mean calculated total RBC loss in the ABN and conventional group was 669.7 and 630.0 mL, respectively (p = 0.572). There was no significant difference between groups for other evaluated outcome parameters, including postoperative Hct level, drainage blood loss, or packed red cell transfusion volume. All patients in the conventional group required postoperative blood transfusion while 96.8% of patients in the ABN group were transfused.ConclusionsThe total RBC loss and volume of packed red cells transfusion were not significant difference between interventions, which suggest no benefit of the ABN system in reducing blood loss and transfusion in patients undergoing SBTKA.Trial registrationThe protocol of this study was registered in the Thai Clinical Trials Registry database no. TCTR20201126002 on 26/11/2020.

The Accuracy of a Portable Accelerometer-Based Navigation System for Tibial Alignment Can be Reliable during Total Knee Arthroplasty for Obese Patients.

A portable accelerometer-based navigation system can be useful for achieving the target alignment. Tibial registration is based on the medial and lateral malleoli; however, the identification of landmarks may be difficult in obese (body mass index [BMI] >30 kg/m2) patients whose bones are not easily palpable from the body surface. This study compared tibial component alignment achieved using a portable accelerometer-based navigation system (Knee Align 2 [KA2]) in obese and control groups and aimed to validate the accuracy of bone cutting in obese patients. A total of 210 knees that underwent primary total knee arthroplasty using the KA2 system were included. After 1:3 propensity score matching, there were 32 and 96 knees in the BMI >30 group (group O) and BMI ≤30 group (group C), respectively. The absolute deviations of the tibial implant from the intended alignment were evaluated in the coronal plane (hip-knee-ankle [HKA] angle and medial proximal tibial angle) and sagittal plane (posterior tibial slope [PTS]). The inlier rate of each cohort, which was defined as tibial component alignment within 2 degrees of the intended alignment, was investigated. In the coronal plane, the absolute deviations of the HKA and MPTA from the intended alignment were 2.2 ± 1.8 degrees and 1.8 ± 1.5 degrees in group C and 1.7 ± 1.5 degrees and 1.7 ± 1.0 degrees in group O (p = 1.26, and p = 0.532). In the sagittal plane, the absolute deviations of the tibial implant were 1.6 ± 1.2 degrees in group C and 1.5 ± 1.1 degrees in group O (p = 0.570). The inlier rate was not significantly different between group C and group O (HKA: 64.6 vs. 71.9%, p = 0.521; MPTA: 67.7 vs. 78.1%, p = 0.372; PTS: 82.2 vs. 77.8%, p = 0.667). The accuracy of tibial bone cutting for the obese group was comparable to that of the control group. An accelerometer-based portable navigation system can be useful when attempting to achieve the target tibial alignment in obese patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Accelerometer-Based Navigation in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Leads to Improved Alignment but No Change in Patient-Reported Outcomes

BackgroundComputer and accelerometer-based navigation (ABN) tools have demonstrated improved mechanical alignment in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). ABN, in particular, is attractive due to avoidance of pins and trackers. Prior literature has yet to demonstrate an associated improvement in functional outcomes using ABN compared to conventional instrumentation (CONV). The purpose of this study was to compare alignment and functional outcomes between CONV and ABN in primary TKA in a large patient series. MethodsA retrospective study of 1,925 TKAs performed by a single surgeon sequentially was performed. There were 1,223 TKAs performed with CONV and measured resection technique. There were 702 TKAs performed with distal femoral ABN and restricted kinematic alignment goals. We compared radiographic alignment, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scores, rates of manipulation under anesthesia, and needs for aseptic revisions between cohorts. Chi-squared, Fisher’s exact, and t-tests were used to compare demographics and outcomes. ResultsThe ABN cohort had higher rates of neutral alignment postoperatively than the CONV cohort (ABN 74% versus CONV 56%, P < .001). Rates of manipulation under anesthesia (ABN 2.8% versus CONV 3.4%, P = .382) and aseptic revision (ABN 0.9% versus CONV 1.6%, P = .189) were similar. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function (ABN 42.6 versus CONV 42.9, P = .4554), physical health (ABN 63.4 versus CONV 63.3, P = .944), mental health (ABN 51.4 versus CONV 52.7, P = .4349), and pain (ABN 32.7 versus CONV 30.9, P = .256) scores were similar. ConclusionABN is valuable in its ability to improve postoperative alignment but does not improve complication rates or patient-reported functional outcomes.

Accuracy of Accelerometer-Based Navigation System Perseus for the Tibial Cut in Total Knee Arthroplasty: No Superiority Compared to Mechanical Instrumentation in Current Practice

Knee alignment after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is essential for implant survival. Several studies on accelerometer-based navigation systems have given controversial results, with or without improvement in knee alignment. The aim was to evaluate the accuracy of an accelerometer-based navigation system for tibial resection during total knee arthroplasty. Twenty TKAs performed with an accelerometer-based navigation system were included in this prospective–comparative study. They were matched (on age, body mass index, and preoperative mechanical axis of the lower limb) in a 2:1 ratio with TKA performed with a conventional technique. The objective of this study was to determine the accuracy of the Perseus System for making the tibial cut on TKA. The primary endpoint was the tibial mechanical angle (TMA) measured on radiographic images at two months postoperatively. Secondary endpoints were the tibial slope and the mechanical axis of the lower limb (HKA angle, Hip-Knee-Ankle). The mean TMA in the accelerometer group was 87.6 ± 2.1° versus 89.1 ± 1.6° in the control group (p &lt; 0.01). The tibial slope in the accelerometer group was 90.0 ± 1.9° versus 89.9 ± 1.3° in the control group (not significant). The mean HKA was 177.7 ± 1.8° in the accelerometer group and 177.5 ± 2.2° in the control group (not significant). This accelerometer-based navigation system during TKA did not improve the accuracy of the tibial cut compared to the conventional technique, but it restored the tibial slope.

Comparison of navigation systems for total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Component alignment is a crucial factor affecting the clinical outcome of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Accelerometer-based navigation (ABN) systems were developed to improve the accuracy of alignment during surgery. This study aimed to compare differences in component alignment, clinical outcomes, and surgical duration when using conventional instrumentation (CONI), ABN, and computer navigation (CN) systems. A comprehensive literature search was carried out using the Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane databases. Articles that met the eligibility criteria were included in the study. Meta-analyses were performed using the Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager based on Cochrane Review Method. The variables used for the analyses were postoperative clinical outcome (PCO), surgical duration, and component alignment, including the hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle, coronal femoral angle (CFA), coronal tibial angle (CTA), sagittal femoral angle (SFA), sagittal tibial angle (STA), and the outliers for the mentioned angles. The mean difference (MD) was calculated to determine the difference between the surgical techniques for continuous variables and the odds ratio (OR) was used for the dichotomous outcomes. The meta-analysis of the CONI and ABN system included 18 studies involving 2,070 TKA procedures, while the comparison of the ABN and CN systems included 5 studies involving 478 TKA procedures. The results showed that the ABN system provided more accurate component alignment for HKA, CFA, CTA, and SFA and produced fewer outliers for HKA, CFA, CTA, and STA. However, while the ABN system also required a significantly longer surgical time than the CONI approach, there was no statistical difference in PCO for the two systems. For the ABN and CN systems, there was no statistical difference in all variables except for the ABN system having a significantly shorter surgical duration. There was no significant difference in the accuracy of component alignment between the ABN and CN systems, but the ABN approach had a shorter surgical duration and at lower cost. The ABN system also significantly improved the accuracy of component alignment when compared to the CONI approach, although the surgery was longer. However, there was no significant difference in PCO between the CONI, ABN, and CN systems.

Alignment accuracy and functional outcomes between hand-held navigation and conventional instruments in TKA: a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundThis study assessed surgical accuracy and functional outcomes using hand-held accelerometer-based navigation following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Question: (1) Does hand-held navigation (the iAssist system) improve surgical accuracy (assessed with five parameters commonly used to evaluate surgical alignment: the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), femoral coronal angle (FCA), tibial coronal angle (TCA), femoral sagittal angle (FSA), and tibial slope angle (TSA)) compared to conventional instruments in TKA? (2) Which surgical alignment parameters among HKA, FCA, TCA, FSA, and TSA can obtain the most advantage from the iAssist system? (3) Does the iAssist system lead to better functional outcomes at two years of follow-up after TKA?MethodsThis parallel-group double-blinded randomized controlled trial recruited 60 patients (30 patients each in the iAssist and conventional group) with osteoarthritis who underwent primary TKA by a single surgeon at Siriraj Hospital. There was no loss to follow-up in the study. All procedures in both groups were performed using similar surgical exposure, prosthesis implant, perioperative and postoperative protocols. Participants in the iAssist group received the iAssist system as an assistive technique, while those in the conventional group only had conventional instruments. Surgical alignments (HKA, FCA, TCA, FSA, and TSA) were recorded using CT scan at six weeks post-operation. Functional outcomes were assessed with knee ROM, KSS, and EQ-5D at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years post-operation. Baseline characteristics including age, sex, the affected knee side, and body mass index were comparable between the two groups, similar to preoperative ROM, KSS, and EQ-5D.ResultsThe mean operative time was relatively longer in the iAssist than the conventional group, although not statistically significant (88.1 ± 13.7 versus 83.4 ± 21.3; p = 0.314). Among the surgical alignment parameters evaluated, FCA was the only radiographic parameter with a statistically significant difference between the two groups and was closer to 90º in the iAssist group (89.4 ± 2.2 in the iAssist versus 87.2 ± 2.1 in the conventional group; p = 0.003). Also, there was a higher proportion of outliers in the conventional than the iAssist group (23.3% versus 10%; p = 0.086). Nonetheless, HKA and TCA did not differ between the two groups (p = 0.25 and 0.096, respectively), although the percentages of outliers were higher in the conventional than the iAssist group (HKA: 26.7% vs. 13.3%; p = 0.101 and TCA: 6.7% versus 0%; p = 0.078). Likewise, we observed other radiographic parameters had no significant group differences, including FSA and TSA. Furthermore, at two years post-operation, we found no differences between the iAssist and the conventional group in knee ROM (106.7 ± 14.6 versus 108.2 ± 12.7; p = 0.324), KSS (82.5 ± 6.4 versus 83.8 ± 3.4; p = 0.324), and EQ-5D (0.9 ± 0.2 versus 1.0 ± 0.1; p = 0.217). All functional outcomes were also comparable at 6 months and 12 months of follow-up postoperatively.ConclusionThe iAssist technology increase surgical precision by allowing for a more precise FCA with fewer outliers than conventional equipment. iAssist had longer operative time. Functional outcomes and quality of life were not different.Level of evidence:I

Accuracy of a novel accelerometer-based navigation (Naviswiss) for total hip arthroplasty in the supine position

BackgroundThis study aimed to determine the accuracy of acetabular cup insertion using a novel accelerometer-based navigation system in total hip arthroplasty (THA).MethodsA single-surgeon study was conducted in which 62 prospective patients with navigation and 42 retrospective patients without navigation in a supine position were compared. Absolute values for errors of radiographic inclination and anteversion were calculated. Navigation error was also calculated. Factors that affected absolute value of navigation error in cup alignment were determined.ResultsIn the navigation group, mean absolute errors for radiographic inclination and anteversion were 4.1° and 4.3°, respectively. In the control group, mean absolute errors were 6.6° in inclination (p < 0.01) and 5.9° in anteversion (p = 0.04). Mean absolute values of navigation error were 2.8° in inclination and 2.8°in anteversion. Factors affecting navigation errors were not found.ConclusionThis novel accelerometer-based navigation system significantly increased the accuracy of cup placement during THA in the supine position.

Does accelerometer-based portable navigation provide more accurate and precise cup orientation without prosthetic impingement than conventional total hip arthroplasty? A randomized controlled study

This prospective randomized controlled study examined whether accelerometer-based navigation resulted in more accurate or precise cup orientation than a conventional mechanical guide. We used a simulation to evaluate how cup orientation affected potential hip range of motion (RoM) and freedom from prosthetic impingement. Sixty hips were randomly allocated 1:1 to accelerometer-based portable navigation or conventional guidance. Procedures were performed through a standard posterolateral approach and combined anteversion technique. Cup inclination, cup anteversion, and stem anteversion were measured using computed tomography (CT). Using CT-based simulation, we evaluated impingement-free potential RoM and the proportion of hips with potential RoM required for daily activities. Absolute cup inclination and anteversion error averaged 4.3° ± 3.2° and 4.4° ± 2.9° for the navigation cohort and 5.6° ± 3.7° and 5.7° ± 4.2° for the conventional cohort, with no significant differences. Navigation resulted in significantly less variation in anteversion error than the conventional guide (p = .0049). Flexion, internal rotation (IR) at 90° of flexion, extension, and external rotation (ER) averaged 123° ± 12°, 46° ± 13°, 50° ± 10°, and 73° ± 23°, respectively, in the navigation cohort and 127° ± 10°, 52° ± 14°, 45° ± 10°, and 63° ± 12°, respectively, in the conventional cohort (p = .15, .15, .03, and .03, respectively). Flexion > 110°, IR > 30° at 90° of flexion, extension > 30°, and ER > 30° were achieved by 93%, 90%, 100%, and 100% of hips, respectively, in the navigation cohort and 97%, 93%, 97%, and 100% of hips, respectively, in the conventional cohort, with no significant differences. Cup anteversion with the navigation system was more precise, but not more accurate, than with the conventional guide. The navigation cohort exhibited greater potential extension and ER than the conventional cohort, but no significant difference in impingement within the potential RoM required for daily activities. 29036. Date of registration: November 14, 2017.

Comparison of alignment and position of prosthesis between portable accelerometer-based navigation device and conventional instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty with valgus deformity

Objective: To explore the differences of alignment and position of prosthesis between portable accelerometer-based navigation device (PAD) and conventional instrumentation (CI) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with valgus deformity. Methods: Patients with knee osteoarthritis and valgus deformity who underwent primary TKA in Peking University Third Hospital from January 2017 to December 2020 were enrolled in this retrospective study and were divided into PAD group and CI group according to the surgical instruments. Five male patients and 44 female patients were included with a mean age of (67.2±7.0) years. The differences in preoperative general data, preoperative and postoperative alignment between the two groups were studied. Results: A total of 49 patients (25 patients in the PAD group and 24 in the CI group) were enrolled in this study. There were no statistically significant differences in gender, age, height, weight, body mass index, surgical side, preoperative hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle, preoperative HKA angle deviation, Keblish classification and Ranawat classification between the two groups (all P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the accuracy of postoperative HKA angle (2.0°±1.4° vs 3.0°±2.2°, P=0.082), coronal femoral component angle (CFCA) (1.5°±1.2° vs 2.1°±1.6°, P=0.144) and coronal tibial component angle (CTCA) (1.2°±0.8° vs 1.3°±1.0°, P=0.695) between the two groups; but the standard deviation of the above-mentioned three indices in PAD group were all smaller than those in CI group. The rate of outliers of postoperative HKA angle of the PAD group was smaller than that in the CI group (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in the rate of outliers of CFCA and CTCA between the two groups (both P>0.05). Conclusion: TKA assisted by PAD can provide good alignment and prosthesis position in patients with valgus deformity, and it is superior to TKA with CI in terms of precision and rate of outliers of postoperative overall alignment of lower extremity.

Accelerometer-Based Navigation versus Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty for Posttraumatic Knee Osteoarthritis.

Posttraumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) frequently comprises femoral or tibial deformity, which makes it difficult to perform total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Accelerometer-based navigation (ABN) could be effective in restoring a neutral mechanical axis (MA) in TKA, but a limited number of studies have been reported in association with PTOA. Therefore, we aimed to compare the lower limb MA between ABN-assisted TKA (ABN-TKA) and conventional TKA in patients with PTOA. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 28 PTOA patients who underwent TKA using a conventional system (cTKA group, n = 16) and the ABN system (iTKA group, n = 12). Standing long-leg radiographs were assessed for MA and prosthesis alignment as primary outcomes. A postoperative MA deviating beyond ± 3° was defined as an outlier. Perioperative outcomes, Oxford Knee Score (OKS) at 2-year follow-up, and complications were also assessed. The cTKA group and the iTKA group had a mean age of 63.07 years and 65.25 years, respectively. The iTKA group had significantly better MA accuracy when compared to the cTKA group (1.60° ± 2.09° vs. 3.59° ± 1.34°, p = 0.01). The iTKA group showed significantly less MA outlier than the cTKA group (78.6% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.02). The prosthesis alignment and OKS were comparable between the groups. There were 2 periprosthetic joint infections in the cTKA group and 1 periprosthetic fracture of the distal femur in the iTKA group. For PTOA of the knee, both conventional TKA and ABN-TKA significantly improved the postoperative mechanical alignment and functional outcomes. The ABN-TKA seemed to offer higher accuracy and less MA outlier when compared to conventional TKA, and thus ABN could be a good alternative option.

Accelerometer-based, hand-held navigation for improved knee alignment in total knee arthroplasty: An observational study

BackgroundMalalignment in total knee arthroplasty has been associated with poor implant longevity and clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of accelerometer-based navigation in restoring the mechanical axis. Methods106 primary total knee arthroplasties performed during February 2016 to September 2017 at a tertiary care centre in India were enrolled in this observational study. We noted the intra-op tourniquet time. Two separate blinded observers measured the preoperative mechanical axis and the post operative radiological results (mechanical axis, coronal and sagittal alignment of femoral and tibial components) and the mean value was taken as final data. Interclass correlation was done to look for variability between the two observers. ResultsThe mean pre operative mechanical axis was 13.74 ± 10.44. The mean tourniquet time was 53.14 ± 7.42 min 91.5% (96/106) knees were within ±3° of neutral mechanical axis with a mean of 1.00° ± 2.68°. The femoral and tibial components with coronal alignment within ±3° perpendicular to the mechanical axis were 93.39% (99/106) and 89.62% (95/106) respectively. In the sagittal plane 89.62% of the femoral components and 87.73% of the tibial components were within ±3° perpendicular to the axis of tibia. ConclusionThe Accelerometer based portable navigation system effectively reduces the coronal and sagittal alignment outliers in total knee arthroplasty and has no role in rotational alignment of components.

No difference in clinical outcomes between portable navigation and conventional instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: A randomised trial.

Portable accelerometer-based navigation devices (PAD) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have been proposed to combine the alignment precision of computer navigation with the efficiency of conventional instrumentation (CON). The aim of this study was to determine if PAD was more effective than CON in TKA in improving clinical outcomes at medium term follow-up. Participants undergoing primary TKA were randomly assigned to either PAD or CON. The primary outcome was the mean between-group difference in the four subscales of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (∆KOOS4 ) between preoperative status and latest follow-up. Secondary outcomes included analysis of between-group differences in all KOOS subscales, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (∆WOMAC) scores, complications and reoperation rates. Of the 178 participants allocated to a treatment arm, 159 (89.3%) completed follow-up at a mean of 4.3 years (range 3.2-5.8 years). There was no statistically significant or clinically meaningful difference in ∆KOOS4 between preoperative status and latest follow-up (PAD=41, CON=43; p=0.5). There was no difference in mean ∆WOMAC scores (PAD=39, CON=41; p=0.9) or ∆KOOS subscales between groups. In addition, there were no differences in complications or reoperations between groups. PAD was not superior to CON in improving patient-reported outcomes or reducing complications and reoperation rates at medium term follow-up. The use of PAD in TKA to improve clinical outcomes alone cannot be justified based on the results of this study.

Can accuracy with the iASSIST navigation be confirmed by assessment? A multi-center prospective randomized controlled trial with independent three-dimensional image assessment

BackgroundiASSIST is one of the novel accelerometer-based navigation systems for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Although the accuracy of iASSIST compared with conventional instruments has been reported, such evaluations were performed on two-dimensional (2D) images (X-rays). This multi-center prospective randomized controlled trial aimed to assess component positioning between TKA with and without iASSIST by 3D image assessment, and to clarify whether the iASSIST provides any benefit with regard to alignment accuracy. MethodsEighty-three knees with primary knee osteoarthritis were enrolled in this study. iASSIST was used for distal femoral and proximal tibial resection in 42 knees (iA group) and a conventional guide was used in 41 knees (CONV group). At 6 months postoperatively, component alignment was evaluated with 3D images by the independent orthopaedic surgeons, and surgical parameters, range of motion and clinical outcomes were examined. ResultsThe rate of knees who have the alignment within 3° of neutral compared with the iA group and CONV group were 92.9% (39/42) vs. 87.8% (36/41) for femur and 76.2% (32/42) vs. 56.1% (23/41) for tibia in the coronal plane, respectively, whereas in the sagittal plane, the rate was 85.7% (36/42) vs. 58.5% (24/41) for femur and 83.3% (35/42) vs. 78.0% (32/41) for tibia, respectively. Compared with the CONV group, the iA group had a significantly improved femoral alignment in the sagittal plane (P = 0.006). There were no clinical or patient-reported differences at 6 months postoperatively. ConclusionsThe iASSIST provides technically high accuracy in femoral resection at TKA compared with a conventional procedure.

The accelerometer-based navigation system demonstrated superior radiological outcomes in restoring mechanical alignment and component sagittal positioning in total knee arthroplasty

BackgroundThis study aimed to determine whether the accelerometer-based navigation (ABN) could improve the accuracy of restoring mechanical axis (MA), component positioning, and clinical outcomes compared to conventional (CON) total knee arthroplasty (TKA).MethodsA total of 301 consecutive patients (ABN: 27, CON: 274) were included. A 1:4 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed between the two groups according to preoperative demographic and clinical parameters. The postoperative MA, femoral coronal angle (FCA), femoral sagittal angle (FSA), tibial coronal angle (TCA) and tibial sagittal angle (TSA) were compared. Absolute deviations of aforementioned angles were calculated as the absolute value of difference between the exact and ideal value and defined as norms if within 3°, otherwise regarded as outliers. Additional clinical parameters, including the Knee Society knee and function scores (KSKS and KSFS) and range of motion (ROM), were assessed at final follow-up (FU) (mean FU was 21.88 and 21.56 months respectively for ABN and CON group). A secondary subgroup analysis and comparison on clinical outcomes were conducted between norms and outliers in different radiological parameters.ResultsA total of 98 patients/102 knees were analyzed after the PSM (ABN: 21 patients/24 knees, CON: 77 patients/78 knees). In the ABN group, the mean MA, FCA and TSA were significantly improved (p = 0.019, 0.006, < 0.001, respectively). Proportions of TKAs within a ± 3°deviation were significantly improved in all the postoperative radiological variables except for TCA (p = 0.003, 0.021, 0.042, 0.013, respectively for MA, FCA, FSA, and TSA). The absolute deviations of FSA and TSA were also significantly lower in the ABN group (p = 0.020, 0.048, respectively). No significant differences were found in either mean value, absolute deviation or outlier ratio of TCA between two groups. On clinical outcomes, there were no significant differences between two groups, although KSKS, KSFS and ROM (p < 0.01, respectively) dramatically improved compared to baseline. The subgroup analysis also demonstrated no statistical difference on clinical outcomes between the outliers and norms in varied radiological parameters.ConclusionsThe ABN could improve the accuracy and precision of mechanical alignment and component positioning without significant improvement of clinical outcomes. Further high quality studies with long term FU are warranted to comprehensively evaluate the value of the ABN.