4.5 Article

Comparison of the clinical and radiological outcomes of three minimally invasive techniques for total knee replacement at two years

Journal

BONE & JOINT JOURNAL
Volume 95B, Issue 7, Pages 906-910

Publisher

BRITISH EDITORIAL SOC BONE JOINT SURGERY
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B7.29694

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Minimally invasive total knee replacement (MIS-TKR) has been reported to have better early recovery than conventional TKR. Quadriceps-sparing (QS) TKR is the least invasive MIS procedure, but it is technically demanding with higher reported rates of complications and outliers. This study was designed to compare the early clinical and radiological outcomes of TKR performed by an experienced surgeon using the QS approach with or without navigational assistance (NA), or using a mini-medial parapatellar (MP) approach. In all, 100 patients completed a minimum two-year follow-up: 30 in the NA-QS group, 35 in the QS group, and 35 in the MP group. There were no significant differences in clinical outcome in terms of ability to perform a straight-leg raise at 24 hours (p = 0.700), knee score (p = 0.952), functional score (p = 0.229) and range of movement (p = 0.732) among the groups. The number of outliers for all three radiological parameters of mechanical axis, frontal femoral component alignment and frontal tibial component alignment was significantly lower in the NA-QS group than in the QS group (p = 0.008), but no outlier was found in the MP group. In conclusion, even after the surgeon completed a substantial number of cases before the commencement of this study, the supplementary intra-operative use of computer-assisted navigation with QS-TKR still gave inferior radiological results and longer operating time, with a similar outcome at two years when compared with a MP approach.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available