Abstract：Objective To compare the discrepancy and consistency in mechanical axis and component position measured by electromagnetic navigation and radiograph in total knee arthroplasty (TKA)to assess whether the navigation system can be used as a substitute for radiograph.Methods A perspective study was performed on 40 cases (61 knees) undergone primary TKA under electromagnetic navigation from July 2006 to December 2006.There were 4 males and 36 females,at a mean age of (66.9 ±8.1) years (range,58-79 years).Mechanical axis angle,distal femoral and proximal tibial cut slope in coronal view (angles cα,β) were recorded both pre-and post-operatively with an intraoperative navigation system and compared against the mechanical axis angle,coronal femoral and tibial slope (angles α,β)measured via full-length radiograph of the lower limb preoperatively and at postoperative 3 months.Consistency in measurement of the same parameters with the two methods was assessed using intraclass coefficiency correlation (ICC).Results Mechanical axis determined by navigation and radiograph showed a mean valgus angle of 9.60° and 9.99° preoperatively and of 1.23° and 1.64° postoperatively,but the two pair parameters revealed no significant differences in the non-parametric test.Mean angle α determined by navigation and radiograph was 89.98° and 88.96° respectively (P ＜ 0.05),and mean angleβ was 90.21 ° and 89.59°respectively (P ＜ 0.05).With deviation value ≤3°,ICC for pre-and post-operative mechanical axis angles,angle α and angleβ was 0.887,0.754,0.632,0.640 respectively.Conclusions Within the acceptable range of deviation,intraoperative navigation data can reflect the pre-and post-operative mechanical axis and prosthesis position evaluated by radiograph.However,the advantages over the consistency of the two measurement methods rest with the evaluation of pre-and post-operative mechanical axis and prosthesis position evaluated by radiograph. However, the advantages over the consistency of the two measurement methods rest with the evaluation of pre-and post-operative mechanical axis.
. Comparison of electromagnetically navigated mechanical axis and component position with radiographic measurements in total knee arthroplasty[J]. CHINESE JOURNAL OF TRAUMA, 2013, 29(12): 1132-1137.
［1］Knutson K, Lindstrand A, Lidgren L.Survival of knee arthroplasties. A nation-wide multicentre investigation of 8000 cases.J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 1986, 68（5）:795-803.
［2］Ritter MA, Faris PM, Keating EM, et al.Postoperative alignment of total knee replacement.Its effect on survival. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1994, （299）:153-156.
［3］Jeffery RS, Morris RW, Denham RA.Coronal alignment after total knee replacement.J Bone Joint Surg (Br),1991,73 (5):709-714.
［4］Matziolis G, Krocker D, Weiss U, et al.A prospective, randomized study of computer-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty. Threedimensional evaluation of implant alignment and rotation. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2007, 89(2):236-243.
［5］Stulberg SD, Yaffe MA, Koo SS. Computer-assisted surgery versus manual total knee arthroplasty: a case-controlled study. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2006, 88 Suppl 4:47-54.
［6］Haaker RG,Stockheim M,Kamp M,et al.Computer-assisted navigation increases precision of component placement in total knee arthroplasty.Clin Orthop Relat Res,2005,(433):152-159.
［7］Lionberger DR, Weise J, Ho DM, et al. How does electromagnetic navigation stack up against infrared navigation in minimally invasive total knee arthroplasties? J Arthroplasty, 2008, 23(4):573-580.
［8］Tigani D,Busacca M, Moio A, et al.Preliminary experience with electromagnetic navigation system in TKA.Knee,2009,16(1):33-38.
［9］Alan RK,Shin MS,Tria AJ Jr. Initial experience with electromagnetic navigation in total knee arthroplasty: a radiographic comparative study.J Knee Surg,2007,20(2):152-157.
［11］Hall-Rollins J. Lower limb∥Bontrager KL.Textbook of radiographic positioning and related anatomy. 1 st ed. St. Louis: Mosby, 2001:231.
［12］Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of osteoarthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis, 1957, 16(4):494-502.
［13］Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 1977, 33(1):159-174.
［14］Guichet JM, Javed A, Russell J, et al. Effect of the foot on the mechanical alignment of the lower limbs. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2003, (415):193-201.
［15］Hunt MA, Fowler PJ, Birmingham TB, et al. Foot rotational effects on radiographic measures of lower limb alignment. Can J Surg, 2006, 49(6):401-406.
［16］Robinson M, Eckhoff DG, Reinig KD, et al. Variability of landmark identification in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2006, 442:57-62.
［17］Bae DK, Yoon KH, Song SJ, et al. Intraoperative versus postoperative measurement in total knee arthroplasty using computer-assisted orthopaedic surgery (CAOS): accuracy of CAOS. J Korean Orthop Assoc, 2005, 40(2):168-173.
［18］Choi HR, Park JS, Jeong DS, et al. Correlation analysis between navigation and radiographic measurement for component position of total knee arthroplasty. J Korean Orthop Assoc, 2007, 42(5):565-570.
