A randomized controlled trial to compare component placement in navigated total knee arthroplasty using original and streamlined registration processes
Nadia C. Sciberras, MD, MRCSEd, MPhill,a Mohammed Almustafa, MRCS,a Benjamin R.K. Smith, MBChB, FRCR,b David J. Allen, MSc, FRCSEd(Tr&Orth),a Frederic Picard, MD, FRCSEd,a,∗ and Angela H. Deakin, PhDaKnee
Background
This randomized controlled trial validated a redesigned version of navigated total knee arthroplasty software with a streamlined registration (Smart) against the previous version (Classic). The objectives were to determine if Smart software had the same accuracy of component positioning and whether registration and operative time were reduced.
Methods
A total of 220 patients were recruited and had a navigated total knee arthroplasty performed. With the exception of the software, all patients had the same perioperative care. At 6-week follow-up with an independent arthroplasty service, all patients had a computerized tomography scan. This was assessed by an independent radiologist to measure the mechanical alignment of the components.
Results
The mean postoperative mechanical femorotibial angles were equivalent between groups (mean difference −0.2°, 95% confidence interval −0.7° to 0.3°, P = .407). Component positions were similar in both groups. Mean registration time was significantly shorter for the Smart group (2 minutes 30 seconds ± 54 seconds) than the Classic group (3 minutes 23 seconds ± 39 seconds), P < .001. The mean operative time was 72 ± 12 minutes in both groups (P = .855). At 6-week follow-up, both groups had similar clinical outcomes with 96.5% of patients being satisfied or very satisfied.
Conclusions
The study verified that a reduced registration time did not alter the accuracy of component placement. However, despite a shorter registration time, the overall surgical time was not reduced.
Link to article